What happened to miracles?

Many people would argue that society has merely swapped one group (religion) for the other (science) as the way of explaining the unexplainable.

Those people being religionists. And this is a bad thing because?

There is no comparison between the two. Science is about testing observable events, religion is about what's inside, this is where faith comes in. They aren't even competing with each other.

The great thing about science is it willing to be proved wrong. It celebrates scrutiny. Can't say that for religion.

 

I don't think you got my point Cydonia.

However, I'm not going to reiterate it over and over.


Those people being religionists

Are you taking religionist as people who discriminate against religions??? If so, I'd just like to point out that I've heard that argument used by many different people from many, many different faiths (and atheists as well).

It isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'm just point it out. However, putting so much faith in science (or religion) that you won't accept anything else that contradicts it, is a very bad thing.

Kithera

 

I agree with your last point. The key is finding a balance between believing everything you hear and being so set in your ways that you're closed off to new ideas.

Religionists are people who are religious. Atheism isn't a faith. Atheism is the abscence of faith. That's the entire point.

I myself am an agnostic. I doubt the existence of a God as told to me through other people's supposed direct revelations. I believe there is a possibility there could be a god, but there has been no evidence to support it. I figure once i believe something without evidence, i'm obligated to believe every single claim anyone makes about any subject in order to be consistent. And the day is just too short!

 

Personally, I believe that although it can be explained by science, doesn't mean it isn't a miracle ...

Exactly.

Atheism isn't a faith. Atheism is the absence of faith.

Wrong. Atheism is the disbelief in the existence of God -- or, in other words, the faith that there is no God. Just as God cannot be proven, God can also not be disproven. Atheism is just as much a matter of faith as monotheism or pantheism or polytheism or any other -theism. For the record, I myself am an atheist.

 

If you think atheism is a faith, you're in the minority of atheists. To be without belief means you are without faith, as far as i'm concerned. To have faith in something, you have to have something to have faith in. When you're basically at "default" stage, (all small children are atheists until they are exposed to the god concept) you don't have faith. You just "are". In my opinion.

 

Funny how simple it is for people to trash God
and then wonder why the world's going to hell.



Uruk-Hai said;
"So I'm blind and deaf? Point me out a modern miracle that can't be explained scientifically and I'll be convinced."

The fact that you are *not* blind, or deaf, is a miracle in itself. The greatest miracle of all, is that of life itself. That you are here, that you exist, that is something that cannot be scientifically explained, except to say that You're here because your parents had sex, they're here because their parents had sex, they were here because their parents had sex, they were here because their parents had sex, they were here because their parents had sex, they were here because their parents had sex...they were here because monkeys had sex, they were here because monkeys had sex,
they were here because monkeys had sex,
they were here because monkeys had sex...they were here because primordial ooze had sex, they were here because primordial ooze had sex,
they were here because primordial ooze had sex...they were here because hydrogen and carbon had sex, they were here because hydrogen and carbon had sex...they were here because...because...well you see...because...Bang! They existed.

_Simple Example_
Parallel to God's Miracle to Hannah

 

If you think atheism is a faith, you're in the minority of atheists.

Doesn't matter one whit to me. I don't label myself an atheist to be part of some group.

To be without belief means you are without faith, as far as i'm concerned.

I do believe. I do have faith. I believe in and have faith that there is not a God.

When you're basically at "default" stage, (all small children are atheists until they are exposed to the god concept) you don't have faith. You just "are". In my opinion.

I disagree. Little kids may or may not be atheists until "exposed to the god concept," but they certainly do have faith -- they tend to have absolute faith in their parents.

 

Here's a few definitions, to clarify where some people are coming from:

Atheism:
1)a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
1)b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
2) Godlessness; immorality.

Miracle
1) An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God: ?Miracles are spontaneous, they cannot be summoned, but come of themselves? (Katherine Anne Porter).
2) One that excites admiring awe. See Synonyms at wonder.
3) A miracle play.

Faith
1) Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2) Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief. See Synonyms at trust.
3) Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
4) The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
5) A set of principles or beliefs.

Having those definitions, I think that miracles occur everyday, right under our noses, that we don't even realize. Not all of them have to do with faith, because some of these occur to people with religious faith and some with none. I see miracles on 2 levels:
1) Those that occur that are inexplicable, with no known scientific explanation.
2) Those that occur naturally, totally explainable by science, yet occur against such great odds (conception is an example of this).

I think that those that are "spiritual" or "faith-based" in nature still do exist. But perhaps it is as Jesus told the blind man to not tell anyone who healed him, so modern receivers of miracles are compelled to keep them between themselves and God. I don't think that God would want a media circus of critics and scientists and reporters trying to explain away a miracle. So, perhaps many of these are unreported.

I also think that God does still talk to people, but only to those who appreciate and understand what it means to communicate with God. For example, many of us live in societies where there is so much noise (music, materialism, politics, capitalism, war, etc). With so much going on around us, I think God speaks to those who truly listen to Him. I think those people are: priests, tibetan monks, etc. I don't think God can get through to many people who are in mainstream society, and I certainly don't think God talks to public figures or leaders that use the media and the public to their own ends. He speaks to the simple ordinary folks and those who have spent a lifetime seeking Him.

That's just my two cents. Sorry if this is a little long.

EDIT: These aren't my definitions. I got them from dictionary.com. I was just using these to illustrate previous posts about how one person thought faith had to be religious and one thought a person couldn't have faith and be athiest at the same time. But, IMHO, atheism CAN be interpreted to be godlessness and immorality.

 

I'd like to disagree with one of your definitions.


Atheism:
1)a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
1)b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
2) Godlessness; immorality.


Specificly the bit about immorality. I'm not an Atheist, but I have known many Atheists who are quite moral people. Religion/belief in God is not the only originator of morality. One can base one's moral code off of what is good for society. Lying, cheating, stealing, murder, etc... are all bad for society. Any Atheist who cares at all about his fellow man isn't going to do those things. He doesn't need a diety to tell him those things are wrong.

 

I believe those definitions are from Dictionary.com. Whatever. I'm so sick of arguing with people who don't understand how someone who doesn't believe there's a God could have morals. My morals are based on my experiences and my upbringing, just like everyone else's. And, as Frank Herbert observed: Respect for the truth comes close to being the basis for all morality.

 

Mastadge, i wasn't inferring that you are trying to join a group. Just pointing out that you have a different take on what atheism means than the majority of atheists. Not a value judgement or anything.

Children may have faith in their parents, that the sun will come up etc. That wasn't my point. My point was that children are all specifically atheists for a certain number of years, and not out of any sort of conscious disbelief in god. Therefore atheism can be separate from faith.

 

Auraveda and Mastage,

Please see my edit. I'm not saying that all Atheists are immoral. All I said was that it "could" be interpreted as having no morals. Certainly there are serial killers who have no belief in God but are quite immoral in their actions. Point is, it's a theory. I'm not arguing with you, Mastage. In fact, I was trying to support your position because the definition of faith says you can have faith in ANY person, idea, or thing; AND that athiesm is the DISBELIEF in the existence of GOD. That is your position, is it not?

I'm not attacking anyone here, and I'd like to not be attacked for trying to post an informed and inclusive statement.

Thanks for listening.

 

I think the only way atheism could be considered immoral, is if morals can only come through god.

 

Well, morals only come through God, ul;timately He's the source that laid the foundation.

Where are the miracles?

You won't hear about too many of them in here, in this forum.

Why not?

Ridicule.



You'll hear jokes made about "leprechauns" etc. You'll be attacked. Probably because it's more important to most people that their current 'disbelief' system isn't challenged. Because if people don't hear what relates to their own preconceptions--then it can't be real. You'll hear how no God would dare to reveal Himself in any way that would contradict what mom and dad believe, or what will keep us accepted in our social circle.

Face it, people don't want the truth if it doesn't match the way the want the "truth" to be. Not if it might come with a real price.

Thank God ( and I mean that literally), I was openminded and willing enough to look up and say, "God, if you're real I just want the Truth wherever it leads. I don't care if it's Buddhist, Hindu, Moslem, Christian, or where ever."


When somebody realizes that if there is an absolute truth to be obtained---it can only come from an absolute authority.

I've seen miracles, eyewitnessed miracles, every bit as grand and great as ones that are depicted in...say, for example,...the Holy Bible.

When someone is ready to sincerely lay it all on the line, put up with the mockery from people who think they know what they're talking about, they'll see a miracle, they'll hear from the highest authority.

I know.

Too bad so many of the rest of the citizens of this planet aren't humble enough to admit they don't know. Because they could.

 

If morality only comes from religion, then so does genocide.

Now, Brooks, as far as your own experience goes, I'm sure you saw what you saw, but I don't think it means what you think it means.

 

"Now, Brooks, as far as your own experience goes, I'm sure you saw what you saw, but I don't think it means what you think it means."


What do you think it meant?
Which experience do you think I misunderstood?

 

Talking about the actual topic of this thread ....

I'm a science student, but also a Catholic. I tend to believe almost all the miracles described in the bible are mythological/allegorical. If you sit around arguing 'did Jesus actually feed so many thousand people with five loaves & two fishes' you miss the entire point of that story - the bottomless cup and the never-ending food source appears over and over in the new testament as symbols of God himself.

But anyway, science cannot explain everything. Science can propose hypotheses as explanations for events ... but these hypotheses can only be proven or disproven if the event re-occurs and can be studied.

That's where miracles come in ... miracles are always isolated events, if they weren't, they would not be miracles. A friend of mine, who's a chemistry technician, had his rosary beads turn to gold while he was on a pilgrimage in the holy lands. When he got them home, he tested them in the lab, and found it was pure gold. He accepts it as a miracle, but I could be the cynic and say something like 'the molecules in the air, coupled with the heat, created a rare situation which reacted with the beads yah di yah' .. but what's the point in proposing such a thing if it can never be proven or disproven? I don't need to come up with crazy theories just to reassure myself that the universe always plays by the rules, and God doesn't really exist. I'm willing to say 'maybe it was a miracle, maybe it wasn't' If don't want to believe in God, then no amount of miracles is going to convince me, and vice versa.

re: why doesn't God talk to people anymore? He does. They call it praying, it's a two way conversation.

 

Brooks:

I was referring to the Conyers vision?which, the more I read about it, comes across as a simple optical illusion gone awry.

For those who just tuned in, the whole thing started with a Conyers, Georgia housewife named Nancy Fowler, who in 1987 claimed to have seen Jesus; afterwards, according to the story, the Virgin Mary appeared to her on a regular basis?the 13th of every month, to be precise.

Word got out, and before long the faithful made pilgrimages to her homestead in vast numbers. Each month, on the 13th, Fowler would relay to the crowd that the Virgin had appeared to her, and repeat her messages for humanity (usually some variation on "Love one another"). During Mary's visits, which Fowler always spent alone in her house (with the Virgin, she maintains), believers would look directly into the sun, whereupon some would see the sun move, spin or transform in ways no one thought possible.

Here we get to the heart of things.

Some observers have taken the sun's perceived acrobatics for miracles, incontestible signs of the divine. The first issue here is that believers' supposed visions vary widely.

Some people see the sun scramble about. Some see it change shape. Some see it spin in place (asked how they could tell if a featureless ball was spinning, an observer responded, "You just can.") Some see nothing. Some walk away with permanent retinal damage.

The human eye is flawed, with blind spots that the mind constantly works to fill with its best guess as to what's there. One might compare the process to that of a computer running a game, rendering images in real time. Confronted with a light source as bright and piercing as the sun, the eye and the mind both go into overload trying to compensate for the strain, and the results can be dazzling in more ways than one. The eye tries to shield itself from damage by displacing or diffusing the light, which can easily result in the sun's perceived spatial shifts and transformations.

Early on, some believers took polaroids of the sun; the image that appeared in the photo resembled a golden door. Some interpreted this to represent the door to Heaven, and some still do, even after the trick has been found to work with any strong light source, anywhere.

Nonetheless, believers continued to arrive, each time in greater numbers than before.

The Catholic Church took notice in due time, and discouraged followers from joining Fowler's flock. Despite the plethora of supposed wonders that accompany each apparition, the Church has yet to recognize any of it.

In October of 1998, Fowler announced that she would no longer receive visits from Mary; afterwards, her then-associates Our Loving Mother's Children, Inc. began broadcasting a monthly recital of the Rosary via satellite. She has since distanced herself from the group, stating that she preferred to spend her time in prayer alone. Her distaste for the group's more commercial tendencies is a matter of public record.

Whether or not her visions were genuine is anyone's guess. As for the crowd's visions of the sun, there's no doubt that many of them saw what they claim to, but given all the factors at work, the question of what it means is still up in the air.

 

Abner_doon, I wasn't trashing God at all. I was simply wondering why the ancients were treated to miracles on a grand scale whilst we don't seem to be given any besides the odd weeping statue or someone who claims to see a vision of Mary. I thought there may be a reason, like Jesus telling us in the New Testament that nothing more will happen or no new prophets will arrive. I don't know - that's the point.

It's no use telling me to open my eyes and ears, they are.

I don't see anything that can't be explained. If I heard voices in my head, I'd go straight for a checkup.

 

Then Uruk Hai,
We must ask what you're looking for or how honestly open you are?

What I saw was no weeping statue, nor was everything involving the sun.

If 100,000 people in Fatama, Portugal, on numerous occasions witnessed miracles of all types, and again at Conyers, Georgia, on multiple occasions in crowds exceeding 60,000 eyewitnesses,....what is it that you expect?

I could tell you about events in an exorcism, but that dealt with fewer people, or of other miracles. But if people refuse to believe, instead offering absurd "explanations,"...what can be said?

(60,000 people witnessing miracles happens everywhere, right? Can't believe eyewitnesses.)

As Christ said,'Should one return from the dead some will not believe.' And of course, after dying on the Cross in reparation for the sins of humanity against God, He did so.


Maybe, just maybe, when there are that many eyewitnesses, one needs to have their head checked if they refuse to believe what everyone is seeing.


Anyway, you asked about miracles, you were told. Believe as you will. If you're inviting people to tell you, but then setting them up to be ridiculed or "debunked"
for sharing...then shame on you.


If I told you the truth, then you had a gift to encourage you to find out for yourself, and then it is not myself who is to be shamed.

If it is of God, and you oppose, it is who that you oppose?


Anyway, peace.




p.s.-"I thought there may be a reason, like Jesus telling us in the New Testament that nothing more will happen or no new prophets will arrive. "


God does all that He ever did, and Christ promised to reveal Himself to those who would follow Him, and that includes throughout all time. He has for me. He doesn't lie.

 

I believe that everything could be understood through science (belive=faith by the way). One thing about science is that things that scince says is can be backed up. A scientest should in theory be able to explain something to you and show you that it is true based on that explnation and observations. If you by chance think the observations and experements can be explained another way, it will be tested and all atempts will be made to prove or disprove your new theory. Religion on the other hand generally will have to be accepted on faith even if it goes against common sense or our observations. As such, I dont believe in an unnexplained miracle.

If an athiest has faith, it has nothing to do with God. It would be faith in himself or faith that people are something, but it would not have anything to do with God.

 

I don't mean to ridicule you, Brooks, and apologies if I offended.

After the first time you mentioned Conyers and Mrs. Fowler by name, I looked into it, drawing on all the sources I could find; accounts from believers, accounts from skeptics, the position of the Church, the history of the site, etc. (Given the chance, I might have checked out the phenomenon for myself, but that's not an option anymore.)

Now, if 60,000 people saw the same thing at the same time, that would be one thing, but the experience seems to have been different for everyone?everyone who saw it, that is; many saw nothing. Some people claimed to see Mary descending from the sky. Some people claimed to smell roses. People tell conflicting stories about what the sun did, and when.

All this, combined with what we know about how the eye reacts to direct sunlight, leads me to believe that the Conyers effect is, barring further evidence, a combination of optics and somatics. No disrespect to anyone involved, or to anyone who believes; I just call 'em how I see 'em.

 

What I saw was no weeping statue, nor was everything involving the sun.

If 100,000 people in Fatama, Portugal, on numerous occasions witnessed miracles of all types, and again at Conyers, Georgia, on multiple occasions in crowds exceeding 60,000 eyewitnesses,....what is it that you expect?

So you agree a weeping statue doesn't really impress like turning water to wine or feeding the multitudes. I'm interested in whatever the 100,000 people saw, honestly. I've never heard of it or Conyers before.

Anyway, you asked about miracles, you were told. Believe as you will. If you're inviting people to tell you, but then setting them up to be ridiculed or "debunked"
for sharing...then shame on you.


If I told you the truth, then you had a gift to encourage you to find out for yourself, and then it is not myself who is to be shamed.

You are misunderstanding my intent. Someone mentioned that they knew someone whose rosary beads turned to gold. I didn't ridicule them. I'm not here to debunk anything. All I'm saying is most things that people regard as miracles that I've heard of are either a little hokey or can be explained, ie doors to heaven in photo's (I had heard that one). I was interested if there was a reason that big spectacular miracles don't occur anymore. I hadn't heard about the ones you mentioned. Like I said in the opening post, this could be a short thread, if someone pointed out something in the Bible to me saying that God stopped proving himself after the New Testament, I'd have been happy to close the thread.

People then told me to open my eyes, I'm not receptive etc. Well, I say please let me know where miracles occur because I am genuinely interested. I'm having personal issues of faith that are causing me to ponder questions such as this. I'm not going to say "You're crazy because you said your friends whatever turned to gold".

I mentioned the voices in my head thing, because modern science recognises mental diseases that cause such symptoms. I'm not bashing God or people's faith or what they have witnessed.

I'm enquiring and hopefully we will have something to debate. Fobbing me off with "You have been told" won't convince me.

 

Kit' is right, atheism is a faith. It's as much a faith as theism. It's also a lot less supportive as a position than agnosticism. I am an atheist, btw!

What happened to miracles? The Enlightenment. Secular society. The expansion of human thought eliminated most of the need for "miracles".

E_S

 

Last warning. Don't spam.