# Faith and "miracles" - read the comments section!



## oldfella1962 (Jul 5, 2022)

Back in the day (decades ago) I offered locals in Alabama a way to "debunk" a possible "angel feather" miracle and was griped at for attacking their "faith". 
But if you think you are experiencing a miracle, wouldn't you _invite _logical outside-your-circle examination into your claim? Wouldn't you want to know whether you are either mistaken or that God really is demonstrating his supernatural divine power? My personal opinions here:

You (the miracle witnesser) really want to believe in "belief". At this point I wouldn't call it believing in "faith" because the Biblical definition of faith is hope in what is unseen. In the miracle scenario you have indeed just "seen", and your belief in miracles is now validated. In other words, you are on a religious bender, and you don't want anyone to make you sober up. IMHO whether consciously or not, you are placing more importance on your personal beliefs than on the cold, hard truth. 

I totally understand that nobody wants their beliefs (in any area of their life) questioned because they take it as a personal attack. But using the best methods available to rationally probe for possible alternate explanations for what you perceive as proof of a legit Godly "miracle" should be expected. 

Perhaps some people don't want their religious beliefs to be lumped in with UFO's, Bigfoot, ghosts/hauntings and other phenomena that have no hard evidence to support them. Regardless, read the comments section to get some reactions to having miracles examined and explained AKA "debunked." 

Four Debunked Religious "Miracles" | RealClearScience


----------



## tell sackett (Jul 5, 2022)

Does God still do miracles? Yes, absolutely. Does Satan counterfeit miracles? Yes, absolutely.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 5, 2022)

tell sackett said:


> Does God still do miracles? Yes, absolutely. Does Satan counterfeit miracles? Yes, absolutely.



Can you give specific examples of modern miracles - whether God-made or Satan-made - that have not turned out to have likely explanations from natural causes? 
I don't have time to research more than my original four in my linked article right now because I'm off to the vet for my dog's appointment.


----------



## tell sackett (Jul 6, 2022)

I see one every day. ?


----------



## j_seph (Jul 6, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Can you give specific examples of modern miracles - whether God-made or Satan-made - that have not turned out to have likely explanations from natural causes?
> I don't have time to research more than my original four in my linked article right now because I'm off to the vet for my dog's appointment.


I can tell of a lady who had grade 3 diastolic heart failure, whose doctor told her she would live with this and battle this the rest of her life with medication. I can tell of her doctor that said this does not happen, who asked what had changed and the only change was prayer specifically when the lady asked in faith if she could just touch the hem of his garment that she knew she would be cured one Sunday morning in prayer at an alter. The same doctor who said, I have never seen this happen and I have to take heart failure off your medical records. That morning when my wife prayed, she came back sat down beside me and said I am healed!


----------



## bullethead (Jul 6, 2022)

https://www.isaandislam.com/testimonies/isa-healed-a-paralyzed-muslim-girl/


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 6, 2022)

tell sackett said:


> I see one every day. ?



I could say that too, just in the fact that I wake up alive every morning. I am grateful for it but considering that billions of people do this every day, I can't say that it's really a miracle.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 6, 2022)

j_seph said:


> I can tell of a lady who had grade 3 diastolic heart failure, whose doctor told her she would live with this and battle this the rest of her life with medication. I can tell of her doctor that said this does not happen, who asked what had changed and the only change was prayer specifically when the lady asked in faith if she could just touch the hem of his garment that she knew she would be cured one Sunday morning in prayer at an alter. The same doctor who said, I have never seen this happen and I have to take heart failure off your medical records. That morning when my wife prayed, she came back sat down beside me and said I am healed!



Not saying that didn't happen exactly as you said it did, but to consider it a legit miracle (by this I mean there couldn't be any rational explanations for your wife's recovery) I would need a few medical experts to weigh in on the situation.

Regardless I had a little trouble following your story. She was taking medication for grade 3 diastolic heart failure, touched the hem of his garment (whose garment? She literally touched a preacher's garment while in church? Is this a figure of speech? Sorry but I'm unclear here) and the doctor was in the same church? Then she came home and said she was healed, and does not take medication any longer?


----------



## j_seph (Jul 6, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Not saying that didn't happen exactly as you said it did, but to consider it a legit miracle (by this I mean there couldn't be any rational explanations for your wife's recovery) I would need a few medical experts to weigh in on the situation.
> 
> Regardless I had a little trouble following your story. She was taking medication for grade 3 diastolic heart failure, touched the hem of his garment (whose garment? She literally touched a preacher's garment while in church? Is this a figure of speech? Sorry but I'm unclear here) and the doctor was in the same church? Then she came home and said she was healed, and does not take medication any longer?



She was diagnosed with this, after EKG's, Heart Cath, the whole 9 yards. She was put on medication, as well as told she could regress to a stage 2 or go to stage 4. Regardless of what she did she would have to be on some medication for the rest of her life for this.
One Sunday morning she went to the Alter at church to pray. Her prayer was just as the lady did in Matthew 9: 20-22. When she came back to sit down she looked at me and said, " I am healed". 
Her next Dr appointment, the doctor could not explain why she was doing better. Which was why he asked what she was doing different and the only thing different was praying specifically. 
The next appointment after that was all of the heart test again. The doctor came back in and said he could not explain how or why, just that THIS doesn't happen. Then added that this had to come off her records cause it does not exist any longer and he could not explain.
My wife went from being completely out of breathe walking 40 yards to the mailbox and back at the age of 47, to not long after her claiming her healing that we did a 15 mile hike.
Not sure if the DR even goes to church, first time we mentioned prayer, all he could say was keep doing it. Second time we mentioned prayer when he had no answer his reply was , well no has proven God is not real


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 6, 2022)

j_seph said:


> She was diagnosed with this, after EKG's, Heart Cath, the whole 9 yards. She was put on medication, as well as told she could regress to a stage 2 or go to stage 4. Regardless of what she did she would have to be on some medication for the rest of her life for this.
> One Sunday morning she went to the Alter at church to pray. Her prayer was just as the lady did in Matthew 9: 20-22. When she came back to sit down she looked at me and said, " I am healed".
> Her next Dr appointment, the doctor could not explain why she was doing better. Which was why he asked what she was doing different and the only thing different was praying specifically.
> The next appointment after that was all of the heart test again. The doctor came back in and said he could not explain how or why, just that THIS doesn't happen. Then added that this had to come off her records cause it does not exist any longer and he could not explain.
> ...


 
Oh I see. Glad she is doing better!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 6, 2022)

bullethead said:


> https://www.isaandislam.com/testimonies/isa-healed-a-paralyzed-muslim-girl/



 It's a Jesus/Islam miracle mashup! I must say it's the first time I've ever heard of that happening.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 6, 2022)

And now a "miracle" without a Hollywood ending.  I mentioned this before, but my mother-in-law recently took her own life. That's not the miracle, just giving you some background on the situation. 

My mother-in-law had cataracts and other vision problems for quite a few years before her untimely death. She had glasses and took medication or whatever, but she was hit-or-miss on doing what the doctor says about any medical condition. So gradually her eyesight was getting worse, which of course affected her driving in the CRAZY Phoenix AZ area traffic. But her husband did most of the running around/errands/etc. so she limited her time on the road.

Her husband got dementia, so eventually my MIL had to do all the driving. Her family was concerned about this, but she said "Jesus cured me! My eyesight is better now. My cataracts are gone!"  Of course she never actually went back to any eye doctor to get her eyes checked out. But she said her eyesight was good as ever now. 

Her husband passed away from dementia/Alzheimers related causes and she started to go downhill psychologically, and she was talking about death all the time and how great it would be to "be with Jesus and my husband".  This whole time her family was concerned not just for her mental health but for her continued driving. She sometimes got her daughter (my wife's sister who lived nearby her mother) or a neighbor or church member to drive her around, but normally she risked it and drove herself. Mix declining vision with reduced decision-making ability from mental health issues and blowing off taking her other medications for diabetes and whatnot, and you have a problem on your hands!

Sure enough, one day she got into a bad wreck involving several vehicles and running from the police, then crashing her car into her own garage door with the police in pursuit.  Yes, she really "stepped in it" this time. Her wreck might have caused a mental breakdown (hence running from the cops in a panic) since she took her meds erratically, but her Mister Magoo eyesight was no doubt a factor.

She was also HEAVILY in debt with several credit cards maxed out and still owing on her house, having to get her car & garage door and who knows what damage to the other cars, and whatnot. And no doubt when she went to her upcoming hearing the judge would request a mental health/wellness exam and likely test her eyesight too. The eye doctors would find out that Jesus did not fix her eyesight, making the odds of her ever getting her driver's license back very low. She would likely be put into a group home against her wishes for her own good, and never legally drive again, thus her independence would be gone.

She felt overwhelmed and killed herself before her court date.  Could she have lived with her daughter who lived nearby? They already had three people crammed into a small apartment. Regardless her daughter (my wife's sister) died suddenly a couple of months later anyway, so moving in with her (had it even been an option) would probably just delay the inevitable fact of my MIL feeling overwhelmed and killing herself.


----------



## bullethead (Jul 6, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> It's a Jesus/Islam miracle mashup! I must say it's the first time I've ever heard of that happening.


Pick a religion and you'll find similar testimonials.


----------



## Spotlite (Jul 6, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Can you give specific examples of modern miracles - whether God-made or Satan-made - that have not turned out to have likely explanations from natural causes?
> I don't have time to research more than my original four in my linked article right now because I'm off to the vet for my dog's appointment.


I can tell you sone stuff, but………..you wouldn’t believe it


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 6, 2022)

Spotlite said:


> I can tell you sone stuff, but………..you wouldn’t believe it



And if offered possible explanations you wouldn't believe them!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jul 6, 2022)

bullethead said:


> Pick a religion and you'll find similar testimonials.



Rastafarians? Because smoking all that weed might inspire all kinds of crazy things!


----------



## bullethead (Jul 6, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> Rastafarians? Because smoking all that weed might inspire all kinds of crazy things!


They got their Voodoo to elicit all types of MOJO.


----------



## Spotlite (Jul 6, 2022)

oldfella1962 said:


> And if offered possible explanations you wouldn't believe them!


Ha true but not 100% true. I’d just say you’re out of context


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 6, 2023)

oldfella1962 said:


> I could say that too, just in the fact that I wake up alive every morning. I am grateful for it but considering that billions of people do this every day, I can't say that it's really a miracle.


Does the fact that billions of people wake up every day prove its not a miracle?  Only if your starting point is similar to Bart Ehrman’s  paraphrasing  now ‘miracles are the very least likely explanation because they are “by definition-rare”.  But THATS Ehrman’s definition and it’s his way of gaming the discussion. I can win any argument if you let me write the definitions of the words I use.  But what if we reject Ehrman’s personal definition and substitute instead that miracles are constantly happening to us and around us and therefore  a most common explanation.  If we accept that definition then your example of you along with millions of others waking up every day fits perfectly and is proof that miracles are so common we take them for granted to the pint we don’t even notice them.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Jan 6, 2023)

Putting Bart Ehrman's definitions aside, I will offer my own definition: a miracle is any very rare occurrence that greatly exceeds the laws of chance and after very close examination has no natural or scientific explanation that would be accepted by a panel of unbiased experts in the areas of expertise required to research the areas affected by and involved in the claimed miracle. 

For example, if an amputee grew a limb back over the course of a month and a team of doctors produced data showing daily limb measurements, photographs and videos of the limb growth (examined by software & video experts) x-rays of the growing limb and the fully regrown limb, took & passed polygraph tests and psychiatric tests, 
and signed witness statements under penalty of losing their medical license if they lie concerning their involvement in the limb regrowth incident, I would then say you have a legit miracle.

"Miraculous events" in the bible that are blatantly the result of supernatural forces that would cause catastrophic damage to the planet and violate the laws of known science I dismiss outright as false. 

For example, when God kept the sun in the sky longer - to give Joshua more daylight to continue his successful battle over the Canaanites we have a complete falsehood. Since the earth is in orbit around the sun (and not the other way around as was thought in bible times) and spins, - this gives us daylight or night depending on our geographical location. The earth spins at about 1,000 MPH which makes sense if our planet's circumference is about 24,000 miles and a day lasts 24 hours. The earth would have to stop spinning to achieve more daylight at any given location. If you google it, you can find out what would happen if our rotation speed went from 1,000 MPH to zero MPH - it's not pretty and would destroy all civilization as we know it. If the "sun not setting" miracle took place say 2800 years ago, then no structure/cities/civilization on the planet could be older than that, because everything would have been turned to rubble and many millions of people killed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the planet didn't hit the reset button 2800 years ago. If you want to believe that, I respect your belief. If you want to believe that the earth is the center of the universe and the sun is just a light in the sky over the earth, I respect your belief. IMHO the story is fiction made up by very normal bronze age humans.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jan 7, 2023)

oldfella1962 said:


> Putting Bart Ehrman's definitions aside, I will offer my own definition: a miracle is any very rare occurrence that greatly exceeds the laws of chance.


Again, no different than Ehrman’s.  You put forth a definition that games the context to the point it guarantees the result you want. 

I reject your definition outright but you threw it out there and built your entire argument on it so maybe you should defend it first.  Why should I or anyone else accept your exclusionary and arbitrary definition of the term ‘miracle.’


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sunday at 12:22 AM)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Again, no different than Ehrman’s.  You put forth a definition that games the context to the point it guarantees the result you want.
> 
> I reject your definition outright but you threw it out there and built your entire argument on it so maybe you should defend it first.  Why should I or anyone else accept your exclusionary and arbitrary definition of the term ‘miracle.’


You don't have to. IMHO I'm not setting a very high bar for what constitutes a miracle. If the bar is too low a miracle would be meaningless. I just think that "miracle" should be way down the list when figuring out possible explanations for any rare or unexpected event. I'm not gaming it to get the result I want. I will accept any result that accurate & thorough examination reveals. So far, every modern miracle has been debunked, and stories about long ago miracles hold even less credibility because there is no possible way to gather enough data to begin to study it. 

Miracles might be possible, but if anything considered a miracle can be explained and thus proven not to be a miracle, it's not a miracle. I've experienced things I cannot explain and not one person has given me an explanation for it that makes sense, but since it can't be replicated nor collaborated buy others, I can't in good conscious call it a miracle since there's nothing that I would consider blatantly supernatural about it. 

But I certainly shouldn't be expected to lower my personal bar of belief if anybody claims something is a miracle. We can both believe that X event happened - there is tangible proof of X that be both agree is legit & accurate - but we might have to "agree to disagree" on how & why X happened, in other words the causation for X to occur.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Sunday at 1:26 PM)

oldfella1962 said:


> You don't have to. IMHO I'm not setting a very high bar for what constitutes a miracle. If the bar is too low a miracle would be meaningless. I just think that "miracle" should be way down the list when figuring out possible explanations for any rare or unexpected event. I'm not gaming it to get the result I want. I will accept any result that accurate & thorough examination reveals. So far, every modern miracle has been debunked, and stories about long ago miracles hold even less credibility because there is no possible way to gather enough data to begin to study it.
> 
> Miracles might be possible, but if anything considered a miracle can be explained and thus proven not to be a miracle, it's not a miracle. I've experienced things I cannot explain and not one person has given me an explanation for it that makes sense, but since it can't be replicated nor collaborated buy others, I can't in good conscious call it a miracle since there's nothing that I would consider blatantly supernatural about it.
> 
> But I certainly shouldn't be expected to lower my personal bar of belief if anybody claims something is a miracle. We can both believe that X event happened - there is tangible proof of X that be both agree is legit & accurate - but we might have to "agree to disagree" on how & why X happened, in other words the causation for X to occur.


Definitions for miracle in the context of the discussion from various notable sources
Merriam-Webster


> an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs


Brittanica


> an unusual or wonderful event that is believed to be caused by the power of God


Cainbridge


> an unusual and mysterious event that is thought to have been caused by a godbecause it does not follow the usual laws of nature


Collins


> A miracle is a wonderful and surprising event that is believed to be caused by God.


Oxford


> an act or event that does not follow the laws of nature and is believed to be caused by God



You will note that not one of them places quantifications such as
"very rare", "greatly exceeds the laws of chance", and "accepted by a panel of unbiased experts in the areas of expertise required to research the areas affected by and involved in the claimed miracle "you are redefining the definition.  An "objective" person would look *your* definition that you used to frame *your* argument and ask, "Why?" or "To what end?", and "Why does this individual feel the need to alter the definition of the key concept he is attacking to defend his argument?"   If I have to change the very definitions of terms to win my argument, that's a tacit acknowledgement on my behalf that I know my argument if baseless.  Morally "objective" people know this regardless of whether they be atheists or believers.  Just thought I would point this out as I don't engage in conversations with intellectually dishonest people other than to point out their sleight-of-hands publicly.  You built a straw man based on *your *false narrative which was based on false and unproven presumptions and then burned him down.  What an accomplishment. Bravo.
 Have a nice day and God Bless.


----------



## bullethead (Sunday at 6:51 PM)

So what then can we accept as a miracle?
Up until sicknesses, germs, medicines and practices were recognized and understood people accepted someone recovering from an illness (because they left it in God's hands) as being a miracles regularly. Still do today.
Really to be "thought" and "believed" something is caused by a God is a pretty broad definition of a miracle.

What is something that happened which can be attributed to a God without question?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sunday at 9:57 PM)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Definitions for miracle in the context of the discussion from various notable sources
> Merriam-Webster
> 
> Brittanica
> ...


Yes, those are official definitions! Regardless, I am not trying to win an argument or make a straw man or whatever. So going off of the definitions you provided, nothing really changes. Granted they don't get into burdens of proof, just give definitions, which is fine. All I did is expand on my thoughts on miracles.
Bottom line the one thing common to all the dictionary definitions is
SUPERNATURAL/DIVINE/GOD which is, from my worldview, a deal breaker. So by any standard I don't believe in miracles. 
I'm not saying an actual miracle in which I believe might not occur in the future, but so far none have. I'm just not seeing how I was intellectually dishonest.


----------



## Spotlite (Sunday at 10:31 PM)

oldfella1962 said:


> You don't have to. IMHO I'm not setting a very high bar for what constitutes a miracle. If the bar is too low a miracle would be meaningless. I just think that "miracle" should be way down the list when figuring out possible explanations for any rare or unexpected event. I'm not gaming it to get the result I want. I will accept any result that accurate & thorough examination reveals. So far, every modern miracle has been debunked, and stories about long ago miracles hold even less credibility because there is no possible way to gather enough data to begin to study it.
> 
> Miracles might be possible, but if anything considered a miracle can be explained and thus proven not to be a miracle, it's not a miracle. I've experienced things I cannot explain and not one person has given me an explanation for it that makes sense, but since it can't be replicated nor collaborated buy others, I can't in good conscious call it a miracle since there's nothing that I would consider blatantly supernatural about it.
> 
> But I certainly shouldn't be expected to lower my personal bar of belief if anybody claims something is a miracle. We can both believe that X event happened - there is tangible proof of X that be both agree is legit & accurate - but we might have to "agree to disagree" on how & why X happened, in other words the causation for X to occur.


I’d agree - no one should lower their “bar” to accept anything as truth.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Sunday at 11:28 PM)

bullethead said:


> So what then can we accept as a miracle?


Well first you would have to find an unbiased person.  That would exclude the both of us......and probably everyone we know, and everyone they know, and on and on and on.  Truth be told we, in all probability, couldn't even agree on the "an extraordinary event" aspect.  We have opposite starting points.  That's just the way it is.  I view every breath as an extraordinary event and I can defend it pretty well.  You in all probability don't view it as such and can defend it pretty well.  I think in the end it comes down to, as always, beliefs.  You have yours based on your experience and I have mine based on mine.  The truly sad part to me is that I know there is a God, and think it's horrible that I'm incapable of showing him to you.


----------



## WaltL1 (Monday at 6:02 AM)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Well first you would have to find an unbiased person.  That would exclude the both of us......and probably everyone we know, and everyone they know, and on and on and on.  Truth be told we, in all probability, couldn't even agree on the "an extraordinary event" aspect.  We have opposite starting points.  That's just the way it is.  I view every breath as an extraordinary event and I can defend it pretty well.  You in all probability don't view it as such and can defend it pretty well.  I think in the end it comes down to, as always, beliefs.  You have yours based on your experience and I have mine based on mine.  The truly sad part to me is that I know there is a God, and think it's horrible that I'm incapable of showing him to you.


Thats ^ a pretty good post SFD.
Basically what defines a "miracle" changes from person to person.
Comment -


> and think it's horrible that I'm incapable of showing him to you.


If there is a God, I would think thats ^ the way he wants it for whatever reason.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Monday at 7:50 AM)

Short of the heavens parting and angels descending we’re not likely to agree on the definition.


----------



## bullethead (Monday at 9:25 AM)

Ruger#3 said:


> Short of the heavens parting and angels descending we’re not likely to agree on the definition.


I wouldn't even need that. I would accept much less of a Cecil B DeMill production where after a mass prayer to whatever God of choice amputees worldwide would all start to regrow limbs. Let Drs and Scientists monitor their progress, scan and test as warranted. Let the scientific and medical community concur that there is no natural explanation.
That would do it for me.

On the other hand, what happened to the Bills player is an impressive combination of having all the right medical personell in place to perform the right procedures on a human who is young and in top physical condition. Time, skill, procedure, youth, healthy all played important roles. A miracle would have been that he had expired and hours after no brain or organ functions he revives and pops up as if nothing at all happened to him and he is on the field this week.
I absolutely thought it was a nice sight to see the teams, players and people across the world come together and pray that day for Hamlin and all the times afterwards. But I also thought that with all of the diversity between individuals were they all praying to the same God?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Monday at 9:33 AM)

WaltL1 said:


> Thats ^ a pretty good post SFD.
> Basically what defines a "miracle" changes from person to person.
> Comment -
> 
> If there is a God, I would think thats ^ the way he wants it for whatever reason.


Thanks Walt.  I'd like to think I've come a little ways humility wise, since my first days down here in the AAA forum throwing out fire and brimstone with an air of condescension.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Monday at 9:43 AM)

bullethead said:


> I wouldn't even need that. I would accept much less of a Cecil B DeMill production where after a mass prayer to whatever God of choice amputees worldwide would all start to regrow limbs.


There's a thread up stairs that I started and I wish you would take the time to drop in and read though and and post if you feel the need.  It's about evidence of our belief.

Reading it there's one common theme and that is regardless of what believers base their beliefs on it's very personal and was exactly what they needed at the moment to make it personal.  A miracle such as you speak of, while miraculous and evidence of God...maybe,  wouldn't be personal to you.  It would just be evidence of God, not his personal interest in you.  That's a huge difference.  What good is a God who shows no interest in you personally.  May as well be the IRS for all the good it does you.


----------



## bullethead (Monday at 11:29 AM)

> What good is a God who shows no interest in you personally. May as well be the IRS for all the good it does you.


That has been a steady point of mine in here for all of my years participating.
I said it before and Ill say it again:
If there is a God or Gods I do not know them. They are welcomed to introduce themselves whenever they'd like.

I will take the time to read your suggested thread. I will refrain from making any negative comments due to the forum in which it is located in.


----------



## WaltL1 (Monday at 11:31 AM)

Ruger#3 said:


> Short of the heavens parting and angels descending we’re not likely to agree on the definition.


Even if we were to agree on the definition then the debate would start as to who/what is responsible for it


----------



## bullethead (Monday at 11:31 AM)

SemperFiDawg said:


> There's a thread up stairs that I started and I wish you would take the time to drop in and read though and and post if you feel the need.  It's about evidence of our belief.
> 
> Reading it there's one common theme and that is regardless of what believers base their beliefs on it's very personal and was exactly what they needed at the moment to make it personal.  A miracle such as you speak of, while miraculous and evidence of God...maybe,  wouldn't be personal to you.  It would just be evidence of God, not his personal interest in you.  That's a huge difference.  What good is a God who shows no interest in you personally.  May as well be the IRS for all the good it does you.


I do think that such a massive miracle such as amputees regrowing limbs would cause many people to seek God and start them to have a personal interest in him whether or not God decides to reciprocate is another discussion.


----------



## WaltL1 (Monday at 11:36 AM)

SemperFiDawg said:


> There's a thread up stairs that I started and I wish you would take the time to drop in and read though and and post if you feel the need.  It's about evidence of our belief.
> 
> Reading it there's one common theme and that is regardless of what believers base their beliefs on it's very personal and was exactly what they needed at the moment to make it personal.  A miracle such as you speak of, while miraculous and evidence of God...maybe,  wouldn't be personal to you.  It would just be evidence of God, not his personal interest in you.  That's a huge difference.  What good is a God who shows no interest in you personally.  May as well be the IRS for all the good it does you.


Are you talking about the "evidence" thread?
Much like "miracles" Ive learned I have to expand my view of what the definition of "evidence" is. I always viewed it in sort of a clinical way but have learned in here "evidence" means different things to different people.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Monday at 11:41 AM)

WaltL1 said:


> Are you talking about the "evidence" thread?
> Much like "miracles" Ive learned I have to expand my view of what the definition of "evidence" is. I always viewed it in sort of a clinical way but have learned in here "evidence" means different things to different people.


Yes. That one.


----------



## WaltL1 (Monday at 11:50 AM)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Yes. That one.


Yeah, Ive been reading along in that thread. Its pretty interesting.


----------



## bullethead (Monday at 11:51 AM)

I just went through the evidence thread.
I will say that evidence is unique to the individual and varies in magnitude greatly.
I can also say that people all over the world have similar experiences and that evidence (to them) is the result of another God, Gods or Belief System.
I cannot see where one is more truthful than the other or how one God stands out more than another given the testimonials above compared to testimonials around the world.

Edited to add:
I didnt want to insult anyone up there who participated in sharing their very personal experiences with my questions and comments.


----------



## Spotlite (Monday at 2:17 PM)

bullethead said:


> I just went through the evidence thread.
> I will say that evidence is unique to the individual and varies in magnitude greatly.
> I can also say that people all over the world have similar experiences and that evidence (to them) is the result of another God, Gods or Belief System.
> I cannot see where one is more truthful than the other or how one God stands out more than another given the testimonials above compared to testimonials around the world.
> ...


I think some questions from your point of view would be welcomed there.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Monday at 2:38 PM)

bullethead said:


> I wouldn't even need that. I would accept much less of a Cecil B DeMill production where after a mass prayer to whatever God of choice amputees worldwide would all start to regrow limbs. Let Drs and Scientists monitor their progress, scan and test as warranted. Let the scientific and medical community concur that there is no natural explanation.
> That would do it for me.
> 
> On the other hand, what happened to the Bills player is an impressive combination of having all the right medical personell in place to perform the right procedures on a human who is young and in top physical condition. Time, skill, procedure, youth, healthy all played important roles. A miracle would have been that he had expired and hours after no brain or organ functions he revives and pops up as if nothing at all happened to him and he is on the field this week.
> I absolutely thought it was a nice sight to see the teams, players and people across the world come together and pray that day for Hamlin and all the times afterwards. But I also thought that with all of the diversity between individuals were they all praying to the same God?


This is the difference in perspective.

Wifes a cardiac critical care RN, death is a too frequent visitor.
Several times she’s told me of patients out of options. Death is just a matter of how long it takes their particular body to fail. The hospital offers counseling and the hospital chaplain for the family to begin deal with the loss of their loved one. Some families begin to make this transition waiting on their loved one to pass. Others will not acknowledge the inevitable until their loved one passes.

Then there’s the families who don’t give up, pray for Gods intervention everyday even though informed of what’s coming. There is no medical solution, no path forward. Treatments end and comfort care begins. A tiny number of these defy the odds. They begin to recover or go into remission. There is absolutely no medical reason this occurs. Drs can’t explain why as it doesn’t make medical sense, they don’t know how long they live as their existence defies all medical knowledge. A miracle, that’s for each of us to decide. When it happens it will tug at the heart of the coolest individual.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Monday at 3:22 PM)

Ruger#3 said:


> This is the difference in perspective.
> 
> Wifes a cardiac critical care RN, death is a too frequent visitor.
> Several times she’s told me of patients out of options. Death is just a matter of how long it takes their particular body to fail. The hospital offers counseling and the hospital chaplain for the family to begin deal with the loss of their loved one. Some families begin to make this transition waiting on their loved one to pass. Others will not acknowledge the inevitable until their loved one passes.
> ...


This is where it gets tricky. Did somebody's cancer go into remission because of the prayers, or would the cancer have gone into remission regardless? There's no way to tell. That said a controlled, legit study with a pretty large pool of subjects was done (The Templeton Foundation prayer study) about the effectiveness of intercessory prayer, and the results are just about what normal chance turns out to be. In some cases, the subjects got worse for various reasons when they knew they were being prayed for! This doesn't mean prayer is counter-productive by default, and I'm not implying that this is the case. 

Of course - people being people - believers & non-believers dispute the results of the experiment. This doesn't mean prayer is counter-productive by default, and I'm not implying that this is the case. Prayer can provide positive psychological benefits to the prayed for and those praying who believe in it, which equates to positive physical benefits so if people want to pray in life affecting medical situations, I see no harm in it.


----------



## WaltL1 (Monday at 4:04 PM)

Ruger#3 said:


> This is the difference in perspective.
> 
> Wifes a cardiac critical care RN, death is a too frequent visitor.
> Several times she’s told me of patients out of options. Death is just a matter of how long it takes their particular body to fail. The hospital offers counseling and the hospital chaplain for the family to begin deal with the loss of their loved one. Some families begin to make this transition waiting on their loved one to pass. Others will not acknowledge the inevitable until their loved one passes.
> ...


I have to wonder how many instances does it take to go from being a "miracle" to "its amazing how the body can recover unexpectedly"?
If you take your wife's experiences and multiply it by critical care RNs around the world who undoubtedly has seen the same thing and it kind of ceases to be a "miracle". 
Unexplainable? Sure.
But does that make it a miracle? Not in my opinion.


----------



## bullethead (Monday at 4:14 PM)

Spotlite said:


> I think some questions from your point of view would be welcomed there.


I'm OK staying in this sandbox simply because to discuss one topic there are 400 possible paths to go down which all connect. To acknowlegde one God because of personal experience means all other Gods should be acknowledged for the same reason and that isn't going to happen up there.


----------



## WaltL1 (Monday at 4:20 PM)

Spotlite said:


> I think some questions from your point of view would be welcomed there.


I don't.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Monday at 4:23 PM)

WaltL1 said:


> I have to wonder how many instances does it take to go from being a "miracle" to "its amazing how the body can recover unexpectedly"?
> If you take your wife's experiences and multiply it by critical care RNs around the world who undoubtedly has seen the same thing and it kind of ceases to be a "miracle".
> Unexplainable? Sure.
> But does that make it a miracle? Not in my opinion.


I didn’t expect it to, just provided an experience.


----------



## bullethead (Monday at 4:24 PM)

Ruger#3 said:


> This is the difference in perspective.
> 
> Wifes a cardiac critical care RN, death is a too frequent visitor.
> Several times she’s told me of patients out of options. Death is just a matter of how long it takes their particular body to fail. The hospital offers counseling and the hospital chaplain for the family to begin deal with the loss of their loved one. Some families begin to make this transition waiting on their loved one to pass. Others will not acknowledge the inevitable until their loved one passes.
> ...


I truly appreciate what you are conveying. I also know for a fact that there are exceptions to each if those rules at make both a 50/50 reality.
If the members of one belief system had an advantage over all the others I could absolutely buy what they are trying to sell. But there isn't a single one that has anything over the other.

Which God answered who's prayer?
Is it possible that Allah granted extended health because even though family and friends are Christian and pray around the patient every day the person in the next bed is Muslim and asked Allah to grant their neighbor health.?.?.?

Why did Duhmar Hamlin recover so quickly? Was it because of Christian prayers, Muslim prayer, Jewish prayers or any number of other things said or done by millions of people who tried something on his behalf according to their beliefs?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Monday at 5:29 PM)

bullethead said:


> I truly appreciate what you are conveying. I also know for a fact that there are exceptions to each if those rules at make both a 50/50 reality.
> If the members of one belief system had an advantage over all the others I could absolutely buy what they are trying to sell. But there isn't a single one that has anything over the other.
> 
> Which God answered who's prayer?
> ...


While there may not be enough solid data, if we could examine the recovery rates of people who had a similar injury that stopped their heart and had similar medical care, we could determine if his fast recovery was out of the ordinary/unexpected or relatively typical.


----------



## Spotlite (Monday at 5:32 PM)

WaltL1 said:


> I don't.


Probably right, unfortunately. I’ll rephrase - I think some questions should be welcomed.


----------



## WaltL1 (Tuesday at 9:45 AM)

Spotlite said:


> Probably right, unfortunately. I’ll rephrase - I think some questions should be welcomed.


Our questions dont freak you out the way they do alot (not all) of other Christians.


----------



## bullethead (Tuesday at 1:02 PM)

WaltL1 said:


> Our questions dont freak you out the way they do alot (not all) of other Christians.


Not a knock against anyone who is a regular above and not in here but it seems that the guys who stay above do it because it is their playground and tolerate the like mindedness there more than the questions, points and counterpoints they'd get down here.
I don't want to take that up there.
They seem more tolerable when they get disagreement from other Christians rather than disagreement from anything else.

I have noticed over the years that a few (not all) who have visited this forum and who's claims, assertions and points got challenged down here left and continued on with their same claims, assertions and points back up there due to it being an easier crowd. They didn't have to answer up there for the questions they couldn't answer down here. And that is cool. Many of us just stay in our lane.

I will say that I do read the threads up above and there is No Question that they get into some Doozie exhanges....but it is mostly contained to who thinks they have a better understanding of the religion or God because "God" is already assumed and agreed upon to exist overall.


----------



## WaltL1 (Tuesday at 3:48 PM)

bullethead said:


> Not a knock against anyone who is a regular above and not in here but it seems that the guys who stay above do it because it is their playground and tolerate the like mindedness there more than the questions, points and counterpoints they'd get down here.
> I don't want to take that up there.
> They seem more tolerable when they get disagreement from other Christians rather than disagreement from anything else.
> 
> ...


Agreed.
I kind of understand it though. Its alot like family can say things about family that if nonfamily said, punches would immediately get thrown.
I read along upstairs when something looks interesting and its easy to see how the multitudes of denominations are/were created.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Tuesday at 6:55 PM)

WaltL1 said:


> Agreed.
> I kind of understand it though. Its alot like family can say things about family that if nonfamily said, punches would immediately get thrown.
> I read along upstairs when something looks interesting and its easy to see how the multitudes of denominations are/were created.


I think every religion that's been around for a while has split into denominations because no matter what you believe in, it will ALWAYS be ran through the unique filter of "yourself" because nobody ever knows exactly what's inside the mind (the unique consciousness) of another person. And with a book so complex and full of stories & ideas as the bible, there are an infinite number of ways to think about it. So when you factor in the sheer number of readers over hundreds of years, I'm amazed there aren't even more denominations than there are.


----------



## WaltL1 (Wednesday at 7:37 AM)

oldfella1962 said:


> I think every religion that's been around for a while has split into denominations because no matter what you believe in, it will ALWAYS be ran through the unique filter of "yourself" because nobody ever knows exactly what's inside the mind (the unique consciousness) of another person. And with a book so complex and full of stories & ideas as the bible, there are an infinite number of ways to think about it. So when you factor in the sheer number of readers over hundreds of years, I'm amazed there aren't even more denominations than there are.


I can agree with you but it still strikes me as "odd" that the supposed word of God is dependent on the readers individual comprehension.
As has been said in here multiple times, surely an omni-everything God could produce something universally understood.
May or may not be "fair" for me to expect that.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Wednesday at 9:21 AM)

WaltL1 said:


> I can agree with you but it still strikes me as "odd" that the supposed word of God is dependent on the readers individual comprehension.
> As has been said in here multiple times, surely an omni-everything God could produce something universally understood.
> May or may not be "fair" for me to expect that.


It's very fair & logical to expect that, but the bugaboo is no "faith" is required.  But that is an interesting concept - a "god" that requires no faith! Is that some Twilight Zone stuff or what? When you think about it, Adam & Eve didn't need a lick of faith if god literally walked around in the garden and interacted with them to a point.

Anyway about a god who revealed itself to ALL HUMANS in the year 2023 in a way that could be scientifically proven and thus accepted as real:
would that make the terms "natural" and "supernatural" obsolete? If this god explained why it created the world & the universe the way that it did and thus put the kybosh on all other manmade religions would there be a point in worshipping it? If this god said there is no afterlife for humans and that Hitler and your sweet grandmother both meet the same faith and are gone forever, would we worship it?  Bottom line would people worship a god who no doubt exists, but does not meet their expectations of what a god should be or how it should behave? Would religious people feel embarrassed because they were duped by their own religions? Would atheists be embarrassed for not believing in any gods? Would much of mankind be ANGERED because god waited so long to reveal itself?
Maybe it would depend on what god's reasons are. Regardless, something to think about.


----------



## WaltL1 (Wednesday at 12:33 PM)

oldfella1962 said:


> It's very fair & logical to expect that, but the bugaboo is no "faith" is required.  But that is an interesting concept - a "god" that requires no faith! Is that some Twilight Zone stuff or what? When you think about it, Adam & Eve didn't need a lick of faith if god literally walked around in the garden and interacted with them to a point.
> 
> Anyway about a god who revealed itself to ALL HUMANS in the year 2023 in a way that could be scientifically proven and thus accepted as real:
> would that make the terms "natural" and "supernatural" obsolete? If this god explained why it created the world & the universe the way that it did and thus put the kybosh on all other manmade religions would there be a point in worshipping it? If this god said there is no afterlife for humans and that Hitler and your sweet grandmother both meet the same faith and are gone forever, would we worship it?  Bottom line would people worship a god who no doubt exists, but does not meet their expectations of what a god should be or how it should behave? Would religious people feel embarrassed because they were duped by their own religions? Would atheists be embarrassed for not believing in any gods? Would much of mankind be ANGERED because god waited so long to reveal itself?
> Maybe it would depend on what god's reasons are. Regardless, something to think about.





> Would atheists be embarrassed for not believing in any gods?


Personally I wouldnt be embarassed at all.
Its pretty rational not to believe something exists until its proven to exist.
I would welcome the answer to one of historys biggest questions.


----------



## gemcgrew (Thursday at 5:44 AM)

bullethead said:


> Not a knock against anyone who is a regular above and not in here but it seems that the guys who stay above do it because it is their playground and tolerate the like mindedness there more than the questions, points and counterpoints they'd get down here.
> I don't want to take that up there.
> They seem more tolerable when they get disagreement from other Christians rather than disagreement from anything else.
> 
> ...


There are more Atheists and Agnostics upstairs than down here. The ones upstairs are just more prone to compromise.


----------



## Israel (Thursday at 8:57 AM)

WaltL1 said:


> I can agree with you but it still strikes me as "odd" that the supposed word of God is dependent on the readers individual comprehension.
> As has been said in here multiple times, surely an omni-everything God could produce something universally understood.
> May or may not be "fair" for me to expect that.


I don't know that it's ever a _not good thing_ for a man to question his own sense of fairness.

Can it really stand the test of the balance?


----------



## brutally honest (Thursday at 9:24 AM)

bullethead said:


> Not a knock against anyone who is a regular above and not in here but it seems that the guys who stay above do it because it is their playground and tolerate the like mindedness there more than the questions, points and counterpoints they'd get down here.
> I don't want to take that up there.
> They seem more tolerable when they get disagreement from other Christians rather than disagreement from anything else.



A lot of Christians (like me) are just not that interested in apologetics.  I love to fish, but I have zero interest in trolling — just not my thing.

FWIW, this forum does seem to have really good _discussions_.  Upstairs, there are a lot of lectures and stream-of-consciousness theology, but good discussions are few and far between.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Thursday at 1:50 PM)

brutally honest said:


> A lot of Christians (like me) are just not that interested in apologetics.  I love to fish, but I have zero interest in trolling — just not my thing.
> 
> FWIW, this forum does seem to have really good _discussions_. Upstairs, there are a lot of lectures and stream-of-consciousness theology, but good discussions are few and far between.


I understand that you aren't interested in trolling, but just giving your opinion or asking questions isn't necessarily trolling, just a starting point for discussions IMHO.


----------



## brutally honest (Thursday at 4:14 PM)

oldfella1962 said:


> I understand that you aren't interested in trolling, but just giving your opinion or asking questions isn't necessarily trolling, just a starting point for discussions IMHO.



Are we talking about the same thing?  Just to be clear, when I mentioned “trolling”, I was talking about dragging a bait behind the boat to catch fish.

I brought up fishing because I enjoy it — but not all forms of it.  Likewise, I enjoy discussing Christianity — but not all aspects of it.


----------



## WaltL1 (Thursday at 4:40 PM)

brutally honest said:


> Are we talking about the same thing?  Just to be clear, when I mentioned “trolling”, I was talking about dragging a bait behind the boat to catch fish.
> 
> I brought up fishing because I enjoy it — but not all forms of it.  Likewise, I enjoy discussing Christianity — but not all aspects of it.





> I was talking about dragging a bait behind the boat to catch fish.


Yeah trolling can be pretty boring. But pretty darn effective at times. Its a last resort for me. Has saved me from getting skunked more than once though.


----------



## Spotlite (Thursday at 8:41 PM)

WaltL1 said:


> Yeah trolling can be pretty boring. But pretty darn effective at times. Its a last resort for me. Has saved me from getting skunked more than once though.


I love it on a windy day!!!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Thursday at 11:46 PM)

brutally honest said:


> Are we talking about the same thing?  Just to be clear, when I mentioned “trolling”, I was talking about dragging a bait behind the boat to catch fish.
> 
> I brought up fishing because I enjoy it — but not all forms of it.  Likewise, I enjoy discussing Christianity — but not all aspects of it.


Oh I see - "trolling" is deliberately stirring up trouble, often by misrepresenting your true intentions. Often it means portraying an exaggerated caricature of a likely antagonist to the status quo. 
Here's another definition:

A troll is defined in the Urban Dictionary as “*one who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument."*


----------



## brutally honest (Yesterday at 12:18 AM)

oldfella1962 said:


> Oh I see - "trolling" is deliberately stirring up trouble, often by misrepresenting your true intentions. Often it means portraying an exaggerated caricature of a likely antagonist to the status quo.
> Here's another definition:
> 
> A troll is defined in the Urban Dictionary as “*one who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument."*



Oh, I know what it is.  I’ve seen some masters of it over the years.


----------

