He didn't make the distinction so you can't argue your 'point'. A blanket statement that all miracles are how religious people 'attribute it to a god for their own reaffirmation in times of doubt' can't be used in a debate because there are more than just 'religious miracles'. Unless I'm correct in that he doesn't think otherwise.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Well, there are religious miracles, which refer to the ones JamDuDe is talking about (I think), and there are medical/social/ miracles, in which the odds heavily favor a certain outcome, and the opposite occurs. Seeing as this is a thread about religion, which one do you think he is talking about? I may be mistaken, but it happens sometimes when you use critical thinking to comprehend what people are saying.wannabe_tank_whore wrote:
Explain when a doctor claims "miracle" when a patient recovers after doctors say they will most certainly die.
It sounds like you have intrepreted miracles as only those confirmed by the catholic church.
Edited for punctuation
id like to see you answer my questionGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
how old are you jamdude?JaMDuDe wrote:
No its because ive looked at other religions and none of them compare to what Jesus did, the prophets who knew of him hundred of years before he came, America was based on christianity and it is now the richest, happiest, and most powerful country in the world. Billions of people have seen miracles, demon possesions, and have seen what God can do in life. And christians go to heaven in most other major religions.
Gee, tank_whore...we've only been discussing religion for the past 18 pages...so it would be pretty safe to assume that I was talking about religious miracles (plus, I was addressing the issue of religious miracles brought up and asked by both JamDude and siciliano).
Medical miracles, as defined, are highly improbable and extraordinary events that bring welcome consequences. They only become religious/faith-based miracles when someone starts attributing divine intervention to it rather than using a scientific investigative process to understand Why the miracle happened.
It's just simple reading comprehension and semantics...
Medical miracles, as defined, are highly improbable and extraordinary events that bring welcome consequences. They only become religious/faith-based miracles when someone starts attributing divine intervention to it rather than using a scientific investigative process to understand Why the miracle happened.
It's just simple reading comprehension and semantics...
you dont need to know my age gunslinger ^^
I seem to remember the topic of science and how it has debunked religion... I could be wrong.Marconius wrote:
Gee, tank_whore...we've only been discussing religion for the past 18 pages...so it would be pretty safe to assume that I was talking about religious miracles (plus, I was addressing the issue of religious miracles brought up and asked by both JamDude and siciliano).
Medical miracles, as defined, are highly improbable and extraordinary events that bring welcome consequences. They only become religious/faith-based miracles when someone starts attributing divine intervention to it rather than using a scientific investigative process to understand Why the miracle happened.
It's just simple reading comprehension and semantics...
OP: "Havent u ever doubted your faith? with science proving more and more things like the big bang theory and finding more and more evidence its hard not to quesiton your faith. "
Looks like I was right. Remember, Marconius, it's just simple reading comprehension and semantics.
What were you right about? I can't find an argument in your latest post.
I'll hold your hand through this one, ken.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
What were you right about? I can't find an argument in your latest post.
Marconius said, "we've only been discussing religion for the past 18 pages".
I said, "I seem to remember the topic of science and how it has debunked religion."
I posted what the original topic was about and if you would go through all the pages you would see that it has in fact been about science and religion.
Then I said, "Looks like I was right."
Now I know simple reading comprehension is hard for some of you but you should be able to see it clearer now. HTH, Ken.
So you are saying this topic is about science and religion...I agree. I simply couldn't find your argument. I can read and comprehend, therefore figured there was no argument over the topic. You need not explain that to me. I believe JamDuDe was talking about religious miracles, judging from his posts in this forum. Do you disagree?
Edit: What is HTH?
Edit: What is HTH?
Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2006-04-12 11:34:03)
my dad was diagnosed with cancer in 98....did not recieve one bit of treatment, and was prayed over in my church and for 6 years now, he has gone back for check up and there is not one bit of cancer to be traced....what do you call that....
....that is a miracle and a blessing for God.
sorry if you cant accept that.
....that is a miracle and a blessing for God.
sorry if you cant accept that.
HTH = hope this helps.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
So you are saying this topic is about science and religion...I agree. I simply couldn't find your argument. I can read and comprehend, therefore figured there was no argument over the topic. You need not explain that to me. I believe JamDuDe was talking about religious miracles, judging from his posts in this forum. Do you disagree?
Edit: What is HTH?
Marconius said, ""Miracle" is a term applied by faithful to a prosperous event that they cannot explain, so they naturally try to attribute it to a god for their own reaffirmation in times of doubt. "
JamDuDe said, "Billions of people have seen miracles, demon possesions, and have seen what God can do in life." He didn't say religious miracles but Marconius chose to say in his definition that miracles were all religious.
I stated, "Explain when a doctor claims "miracle" when a patient recovers after doctors say they will most certainly die." In other words, a doctor who could or could not be religious states that an event which he/she has witnessed is a miracle because he/she can't explain how it came about. Under Marconius' definition the doctor wouldn't fit.
Marconius later said, "we've only been discussing religion for the past 18 pages...so it would be pretty safe to assume that I was talking about religious miracles ."
He only recanted when I brought up the idea of a medical miracle that didn't fit his definition. I then said, "I seem to remember the topic of science and how it has debunked religion... I could be wrong." I posted the topic of the idea of science debunking religion and said, "Looks like I was right."
Was it that hard to follow? HTH.
I do if I want to continue a discussion with a grown adult who has got esteblished well thought out opinions of the world or a teenager who is still trying to figure his niche in lifeJaMDuDe wrote:
you dont need to know my age gunslinger ^^
Here is an example of a miracle that was stated by doctors and attributed to God by the recipients. Quite the conundrum for Marconius' definition.siciliano732 wrote:
my dad was diagnosed with cancer in 98....did not recieve one bit of treatment, and was prayed over in my church and for 6 years now, he has gone back for check up and there is not one bit of cancer to be traced....what do you call that....
....that is a miracle and a blessing for God.
sorry if you cant accept that.
Then why doesnt he does that, or at least a part of it, so we can SEE he exists? What does he has to hide? What is he afraid?unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Though if God exists, he could destroy the universe on a whim, which places him a step above the mythical figure of Chuck Norris. That would certainly change things a bit...Y-D-Donut? wrote:
After all its someones choice to have faith or not. Some do because they belive the stories, some don't because the same reasons I dont. Its all a choice, ur choice. Science, Facts, Reasons, Sence or Faith. No one, not even God himself if he exists, can change that.
That is called that some people have the power on their body to fight cancer, even destroy it with no treatment. Things like that not only happen to people that pray, since my best friend, had liver cancer at its begginings, (he was a non- beliver) , he fought it whitout kimo or anything, and right now, a year later, he is healthy... VERY HEALTHYsiciliano732 wrote:
my dad was diagnosed with cancer in 98....did not recieve one bit of treatment, and was prayed over in my church and for 6 years now, he has gone back for check up and there is not one bit of cancer to be traced....what do you call that....
....that is a miracle and a blessing for God.
sorry if you cant accept that.
And I suppose there has never been a medical mis-diagnosis?siciliano732 wrote:
my dad was diagnosed with cancer in 98....did not recieve one bit of treatment, and was prayed over in my church and for 6 years now, he has gone back for check up and there is not one bit of cancer to be traced....what do you call that....
....that is a miracle and a blessing for God.
sorry if you cant accept that.
It remains unsolved because we will never find it. That question was created when religion was created. I mean the old "everything happens for a reason" thing. As a non-beliver, Ive taken my self to know we have no true purpose, we were just a creation of nature, throughout her billions of years evolving. Why r we here? Because Nothing. Were just here like your dog, cat, the bird that stoles ur McDonalds meal, its just that the human was the must "inteligent" one to create something called religion and fuck ur minds with all these questions, questions that don't have an answer.B.Schuss wrote:
well, science may have a small idea about A., but I dare say B. remains unresolved, at least "officially".Spark wrote:
That's an excellent point.
Who made religion? Men.
Who thought they communicated with God? Men.
Who wrote the Bible? Men.
Who preach religion? Men.
As far as I can see it, religion was created by a new civilization desprately wanting to understand A. How the world was created B. Why it was created. The gap has now been filled. Religion's original purpose is now redundant.
The answer to the question "why are we here ?" is still the biggest mystery to solve.
I wonder what our christian friends think about this.
PS: And to Spark, thanks for that post, thats exactly my point about my earlier "speech".
Last edited by Y-D-Donut? (2006-04-12 12:44:23)
Y-D God doesnt only do miracles on believers, he loves everybody. You guys will always be able to doubt things. Its pretty sad when theres a miracle the science people need to say " It must have been a mis-diagnosis" or sumthing. Y-D is your friend still a non-believer today?
didnt think so
Not necessarily mis-diagnosis, but what is YOUR definition of a miracle? He beat incredible odds, well, maybe yes, but does that constitute a miracle? The point is, you see things that are unlikely to happen and call them a miracle. I, as a nonbeliever, see things that are unlikely to happen and must turn to science, unless there is no solid reason. No one is wrong or right, thats the bottom line. I think it is pretty sad when someone sees something that isn't probable, and says, "Oh, its a miracle. Thank God." You believe in God, I don't believe He was, is, or ever will be here. Is there something wrong with that? I don't think there is anything wrong with believing in God, just when people tell me that is the TRUTH.JaMDuDe wrote:
Y-D God doesnt only do miracles on believers, he loves everybody. You guys will always be able to doubt things. Its pretty sad when theres a miracle the science people need to say " It must have been a mis-diagnosis" or sumthing. Y-D is your friend still a non-believer today?
When something incredible happens and changes something for the good and science and the human brain cant explain it, that is a miracle. Not when something unlikely happens. I think its pretty sad when sumthing incredible happens and people say we need to study this more cause science says it cant happen.
that attitude is no different than when muslims blame everything wrong in their lives because of the wrath of godJaMDuDe wrote:
When something incredible happens and changes something for the good and science and the human brain cant explain it, that is a miracle. Not when something unlikely happens. I think its pretty sad when sumthing incredible happens and people say we need to study this more cause science says it cant happen.
You're going to hell.Marconius wrote:
Gee, tank_whore...we've only been discussing religion for the past 18 pages...so it would be pretty safe to assume that I was talking about religious miracles (plus, I was addressing the issue of religious miracles brought up and asked by both JamDude and siciliano).
Medical miracles, as defined, are highly improbable and extraordinary events that bring welcome consequences. They only become religious/faith-based miracles when someone starts attributing divine intervention to it rather than using a scientific investigative process to understand Why the miracle happened.
It's just simple reading comprehension and semantics...
Gunslinger u cant understand it. Your asking God to come through a closed door. You cant understand it unless u open up your heart to Him. He is there.
...As opposed to saying unequivocally it is God?JaMDuDe wrote:
When something incredible happens and changes something for the good and science and the human brain cant explain it, that is a miracle. Not when something unlikely happens. I think its pretty sad when sumthing incredible happens and people say we need to study this more cause science says it cant happen.
Who's he? This question was directed at everybody.SilentNoise105 wrote:
You really think he's gonna answer you?Yeticus Rex wrote:
Another page of unresponsiveness goes by. Come on guys, no matter what side of the issue you are on, give this some thought.Yeticus Rex wrote:
This question bears repeating.
Feelings, yes......beliefs, no. Elephants and monkeys have been shown that they grieve for their dead, but they do not express faith towards anything intangible (ex. - God).We cannot understand animals and we cannot tell if they have feeling or beliefs, and because of that we assume they don't. Doesn't that make sense to you?
My question never implied that we have the "right to simply cast them off". It did imply that they do not have the capacity for faith.I mean just because we aren't able to talk or communicate with them, doesn't that give us the right to simply cast them off as useless, empty-headed beings witout any hope or reasoning?
Instinct, not faith. No ant worships the queen, but they are genetically wired (instinct) to protect her for the survival of the colony.Its apparent that animals don't communicate with eachother, I mean ants don't get together to make a colony and worship the queen ant,
Again, instinct.....and the ability to realize (tangibly) that teamwork helps in providing something tangible (food).and wolves have never hunted in packs in order to have a more effective chance of getting food and surviving!
Sarcasm!None of these things have ever happened!
This is even debatable amongst religious scholars, let alone any non-religious scholars. I certainly don't agree to that notion even though I'm catholic.Rational thought did not exist until humans were miraculously placed on Earth by an invisable, all-mighty being and told them to believe his way or he'll destroy you (despite the fact that I gave you the option of freewill). To finish it off, god made an entire universe (billions of light-years big) and focused all of his power on one tiny planet.
Hey, read this Time article.....hot off the press. http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazin … 13,00.htmlCome on now people, if this doesn't make sense, I just don't know what does!
And to further broaden everyone's horizon, read what some scientific panelists have to say about Science and Faith (a PBS show).http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/relig … /bios.html There are 5 questions on the left....just click on one and read their responses. You will see that the conclusion is that science does not disprove faith, and faith does not trump science.