The "science" of Miracles

Ah, there's the tell again.Game over then.

I'm saying exactly the reverse. How on earth can you be confused about that? I'm saying that by definition a miracle is inexplicable. It's the paradox that makes it miraculous. So maybe it's me. How can we know that something has defied a natural law without testing that the something has defied a natural law?Or are you simply demoting a miracle to a personal experience? Perhaps this is it. The miracle has to happen in our natural world for us to observe it. Wine turns to blood as it is spoken at by a priest. This is a measurable phenomenom because it exists in our world. But it's also totally impossible, hence miracle. We measure the outcome, we can't measure the mechanism because it's supernatural. You're just saying that miracles are impossible again.

That's the only definition of a miracle. If something is possible, it can't be a miracle. You're confusing outcomes (natural world), with mechanisms (supernatural). Wine and blood are natural - can be tested. Wine turning into blood is supernatural - can't be tested. I happen to believe that there are no such things as miracles. Our beliefs are both irrelevant.

If there was an actual instance of wine turning into blood we'd immediatetly call it fraud or a mistake and dismiss it out of hand because we know that it is impossible for a person to turn wine into blood just by talking at it.If, however, wine repeatedly changed into blood at the moment it was chanted over by a priest during the religious service - as Catholics claim it does - and we could properly test that it had done so, then it would be a miracle. By definition. No, it's alchemy. We know that it's impossible to do what has been done. You can't dismiss our knowledge, there is no gap in our knowledge where we can posit a natural cause - not even theoretically.

Well we are discussing something that has never happened and will never happen, maybe that's why there's no evidence to produce? Well if natural causes have been ruled out, what is left? A miracle is where science says - 'that's impossible'. Yes And that's your non sequitur.It's the cause of the miraculous event that is impossible not the event itself. Blood and wine are everyday materials. They don't change naturally from one to the other. For that we require an supernatural intervention.If you wish it to be clearer, if the Empire State Building was turned into an over-ripe banana by a priest saying a magic word, it would be a miracle would it not? If Trump uttered a truth that would be a miracle. If you car never needed gas again despite travelling thousands of miles etc etc. There are an infinite absurd situation that if they happened would be called miraculous. It's simply your assertion that a miracle can not happen in the natural world, and it's an absurd position because for us to notice them they MUST occur in the natural world. By this insistence you're just saying miracles are impossible and wishing the word away What reality? The idea of a miracle is a total fantasy, but it's definition stands. If you want to say that miracles don't exist, fine, I agree. But you can't argue that the concept of a miracle doesn't.

So if the Empire State Building was turned into a banana by a preacher uttering a magic word that would not be a miracle. Ok, there's nothing left to be said.

And the word we use when the something that has happened has broken all natural laws iswait for ita miracle.G'night.

I normally give up when things get this repetitive.All that's necessary to resolve this is an admission that a miracle is a paradox.It's definition means that the impossible has happened. And as both ringo and Jar are very fond of saying, if the impossible happens, it wasn't impossible.So you either stick with the definition and accept that it has a meaning which requires a supernatural intervention in the natural world - the seperation of causation and materials (my position) or you insist that anything that happens in our world regardless of cause is possible and therefore non-miraculous no matter how impossible the event seems (their position).In their position a miracle can not exist - not in any way we could know about it anyway. It's a philosophical position and deeply suspect as a result.My position at least allows for the possibility of miraculous interventions - even though I believe them to be preposterous. It's a pragmatic position. It also keeps the word in the dictionary for which I can only apologise.Best I can do.

Breaking the laws of physics=impossibleEdited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Yes I know. I know because you've asserted it a couple of dozen times now. It's still as wrong as the first time you said it.If a priest said 'fly up to heaven' and the Firth of Forth Bridge sprouted two thousand foot wings and flew off into the sunset, scatterring trains, cars and people on its way, whilst whistelling Halleluya you'd still be shaking your head saying, 'no miracle, no sir.'

quote:

---

An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God.

---

quote:

---

an extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore attributed to a divine agency.

---

quote:

---

an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs

---

quote:

---

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

---

quote:

---

Ecclesiastical Terms) an event that is contrary to the established laws of nature and attributed to a supernatural cause

---

Etc etc

He says that he just asked god to do it and he's as surprised as you are. There are 500 videos from multiple angles and several thousand eye witnesses all showing and telling the same thing. The RAF was scrambled and followed the bridge until it left the earth's atmosphere. They have photographs of laughing cherubs frolicking on the bridge and a man in a beard is looking on from a cloud. What more scientific evidence do you require? I can give you anyting you ask for - what will it take?Or is it that once again all you're saying is that you believe that miracles are impossible?

breaking natural/scientific laws=impossible

quote:

---

An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God.

​

an extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore attributed to a divine agency.

---

Etc

We ask the priest to do it again with London bridge. This time the scientist have every bit of equipment imaginable. It all checks out. They capture a cherub. It's tricky because basically he can go anywhere he wants anytime he likes, but he decides to stick around and be tested. He's definitely not natural and he tells you in ancient hebrew that he works from the god of Abraham and takes a team from NASA to check out the Pearly Gates.Need anything else?

I can provide you with every possible piece of information you ask for, god and his minions are co-operating fully. Just ask and you get the answer. You're free to test anything with anything.Satisfied?Or have you, in fact, found yourself arguing non-scientifically like a creationist demananding the absolute proof that you can't actually define and believe can't exist.