Historicity of Claimed Miracles

[Ingledsva]

Jesus is not God.


John 14:10"Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works. 11"Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe because of the works themselves.

Yes he is

" I will do it"

Nope, he never claims to be God.


Also, please put the book and verse number when quoting the scriptures so we can see what the full section, or sentence says, in context, and look it up in the original languages. Thanks.


John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

John 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

John 14:13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

John 14:14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

John 14:16 And I will pray to the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

John 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.


None of this says Jesus is God. It says He is in God, and God is in him, - however God speaks through him, and God does the works.


He is not God, and never claims to be.


*

 

[allright]

If you want to debate with someone about whether Jesus is God start another thread'. this one is about miracles

 

[idav]

If you want to debate with someone about whether Jesus is God start another thread'. this one is about miracles

So one argument from the article was that if the miracles of Jesus actually happened they would be by natural means. I tend to agree with this because the idea of a physical cause would have a physical affect. IOW no natural laws are ever violated, they don't have to be because nature allows for so much more then what we are used to being constrained to.

 

[Copernicus]

It is also important to remember that the concept of miracles relies on a presumption of Cartesian dualism, the idea that minds and spirits can exist independently of physical bodies. This extra spiritual plane of existence is thought to be able to have a causal impact on the physical world. That is how we usually think of miracles--as physical events with supernatural causes.

We know that minds exist, since we think , but Cartesian dualism is not the only possible way to explain them. An alternative view is that thought processes--perceptions, emotions, volition, memories, etc.--are caused by the physical activity in brains. So there is no separate "supernatural" plane of existence that can cause miracles. There is just mental activity emerging from complex physical interactions.

How would we test for the existence of a spiritual plane of existence? Well, we can observe physical events in brains with some very advanced techniques these days. One thing we can do is try to identify facets of mental activity that have no correspondence with observed physical activity. We could discover that physical events in the brain always logically follow thoughts, which would suggest that something outside of the physical world is having a causal influence on brain activity. So far, scientists have failed to find any evidence for the spiritual world, and people have been searching for such evidence throughout recorded history. Miracles are one alleged phenomenon that people have proposed as evidence, but none have ever been scientifically verified as anything other than naturally-caused events.

 

[Ingledsva]

If you want to debate with someone about whether Jesus is God start another thread'. this one is about miracles

LOL! That is quite the Cop-Out, - as YOU brought up the "ONE TRUE GOD," and "miracles," in post #58.


I answered YOUR post, #59, saying Jesus never claimed to be God, - and used the verse you alluded to, -


And you replied telling me, #60, "Yes he is," using a specific text with "I will do it" as your attempt at proof.


Hence my answer, #61, showing the whole text in context, showing he is not, nor did he say, that he is God. Jesus attributed both his words, and works, to God, not to himself.



*

 

[George-ananda]

How would we test for the existence of a spiritual plane of existence? Well, we can observe physical events in brains with some very advanced techniques these days. One thing we can do is try to identify facets of mental activity that have no correspondence with observed physical activity.

This would not be true at least in my eastern (Indian/Hindu) view of things. The physical body is interpenetrated by etheric, astral and mental bodies. Thought occurs in the highest level, mental plane, and is carried downwards to grosser planes of matter by sympathetic vibrations down to the physical level. So we would not expect to find mental activity without observed physical activity.

Miracles are one alleged phenomenon that people have proposed as evidence, but none have ever been scientifically verified as anything other than naturally-caused events.

How can miracles, such as our Padre Pio miracle, ever be scientifically verified. 'Unknown' is a valid answer available to science (and it's been used in investigations before) so the concept of scientific verification of a miracle becomes impossible. Your quote is not really telling us anything.

 

[idav]

So we would not expect to find mental activity without observed physical activity.

His point is pretty valid. If a physical cause is found then there is no other unknown to look for.. The more we look the more we just keep finding natural causes. They found causes down to the micro level by finding the higgs boson and it doesn't go down infinitely.

 

[George-ananda]

His point is pretty valid. If a physical cause is found then there is no other unknown to look for.. The more we look the more we just keep finding natural causes. They found causes down to the micro level by finding the higgs boson and it doesn't go down infinitely.

I think you're not getting my point.

But what causes the physical cause?

If they can only study physical activity within the range of their equipment, what else can they find but physical things within that range? But so far, no physical cause has been found for consciousness. I'm saying the cause of consciousness is too fine to be caught in their net.

The theory I'm proposing says scientists are only seeing the effect of consciousness, not the cause. They are thinking they are seeing the cause.

I'll admit to not understanding much about higgs-boson; not many do. But, anyway it's still part of the gross physical plane that scientists explore. The subtle matter planes are of vibratory and dimensional aspects beyond our current ability to detect; think more like interpenetrating multiverses.

 

[Copernicus]

This would not be true at least in my eastern (Indian/Hindu) view of things. The physical body is interpenetrated by etheric, astral and mental bodies. Thought occurs in the highest level, mental plane, and is carried downwards to grosser planes of matter by sympathetic vibrations down to the physical level. So we would not expect to find mental activity without observed physical activity.

First of all, if what you are saying were true, how could you or any human being possibly come to know that? The likeliest explanation is imagination + faith. Secondly, experimental evidence shows unequivocably that you can control mental function by physically altering the brain. So the dependence of the mental on the physical seems unequivocal.

How can miracles, such as our Padre Pio miracle, ever be scientifically verified. 'Unknown' is a valid answer available to science (and it's been used in investigations before) so the concept of scientific verification of a miracle becomes impossible. Your quote is not really telling us anything.

I've read those miracles, and most of them, if they indeed happened as described, are easily described as having mundane explanations. But people searching for evidence of miracles are prone to interpret the anecdotes differently. In such cases, it is easy for the stories to get embellished in the retelling.

I think you're not getting my point.

But what causes the physical cause?

Other physical events in the complex system of brain activity. For example, drinking alcohol can alter judgments that one would otherwise make while sober. We actually know quite a bit more about the physical basis of cognition than you seem to be aware of. There are no mental functions that do not correspond to brain activity. The facile claim is that there is something special about brain tissue that makes it susceptible to magical influences, but there is absolutely no evidence to support this. Indeed, quite the contrary.

If they can only study physical activity within the range of their equipment, what else can they find but physical things within that range? But so far, no physical cause has been found for consciousness. I'm saying the cause of consciousness is too fine to be caught in their net.

Yet we don't need any fancy scientific equipment to know that a conk on the head can cause you to lose consciousness. How do you explain that if consciousness is not sustained by physical brain activity? Indeed, all of the components that go to make up consciousness--sensations, emotions, calculations, muscular actuation, memory, etc.--are clearly controlled by specific areas of brain structure. The strongest evidence for this is simply observation of how damage to those areas causes specific mental and behavioral dysfunction. However, we also have evidence from other sources, e.g. experiments done with scans that detect blood flow activity that correlates with specific mental functions.

The theory I'm proposing says scientists are only seeing the effect of consciousness, not the cause. They are thinking they are seeing the cause.

You are not proposing anything like a "theory" if it is untestable. If you want to call it that, then propose a reasonable method for verifying it. Scientists have done their best to find some external cause of brain activity, even if they can't actually see the cause. After all, we cannot detect dark matter (yet), but we can determine that it exists from its effects on matter that we can detect. So science is not powerless to deduce the existence of undetectable forces. All it needs is some reason to posit their existence, and we have nothing to support your speculation (NOTE: does not equal "theory").

 

[George-ananda]

First of all, if what you are saying were true, how could you or any human being possibly come to know that?

Advanced masters that I have come to revere have observed the universe through their subtle bodies. Consciousness can perceive beyond the range of physical instruments.

The likeliest explanation is imagination + faith.

It's observational science; Vedic Science.

Secondly, experimental evidence shows unequivocably that you can control mental function by physically altering the brain.

This is in agreement with the Vedic model. Physical consciousness goes through the physical brain so altering the physical brain will alter physical consciousness.

So the dependence of the mental on the physical seems unequivocal.

Agreed. For physical consciousness the mental is dependent on the physical.

Other physical events in the complex system of brain activity. For example, drinking alcohol can alter judgments that one would otherwise make while sober. We actually know quite a bit more about the physical basis of cognition than you seem to be aware of. There are no mental functions that do not correspond to brain activity.

These are things I've already agreed with and is what we would expect to see in the Vedic model.

The facile claim is that there is something special about brain tissue that makes it susceptible to magical influences, but there is absolutely no evidence to support this. Indeed, quite the contrary.

It's not magic. If you are interested further you can look up Etheric Body on the internet. This body transfers energy and information from the higher planes to the physical. People can clairvoyantly see these bodies and their energy auras.

Yet we don't need any fancy scientific equipment to know that a conk on the head can cause you to lose consciousness. How do you explain that if consciousness is not sustained by physical brain activity?

Again, physical consciousness must go through the physical brain. Trauma can cause loss of physical consciousness.

Indeed, all of the components that go to make up consciousness--sensations, emotions, calculations, muscular actuation, memory, etc.--are clearly controlled by specific areas of brain structure. The strongest evidence for this is simply observation of how damage to those areas causes specific mental and behavioral dysfunction. However, we also have evidence from other sources, e.g. experiments done with scans that detect blood flow activity that correlates with specific mental functions.

This is all consistent with the Vedic model of consciousness.

You are not proposing anything like a "theory" if it is untestable.

You are correct in that it is not currently testable by Science with its current technology. Science can not now address the issue. But I, in forming my personal beliefs, can intelligently consider all evidence. I believe the many masters of the Vedic tradition present the most reasonable theory I've heard.

If you want to call it that, then propose a reasonable method for verifying it. Scientists have done their best to find some external cause of brain activity, even if they can't actually see the cause.

Let's wait a century until 2114. A lot has happened during 1914-2014.

After all, we cannot detect dark matter (yet), but we can determine that it exists from its effects on matter that we can detect.

Can these subtle planes contain dark matter? Just throwing that out there.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm glad that by the word 'us' you are at least including yourself too. I do the best I can to consider objectively.

There are people that swallow too much in their emotional need for belief. There are also people who for whatever reasons have developed such an anti-paranormal bent that their minds are closed.

Out of curiosity, are there ANY paranormal claims that you reject?

 

[George-ananda]

Out of curiosity, are there ANY paranormal claims that you reject?

Very funny.

Yes, those that reason has showed me are fraudulent. Also, sometimes people read too much into things. Some claims can be ridiculous or caused by mental illness, etc..

I use intelligence on a case by case basis.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Advanced masters that I have come to revere have observed the universe through their subtle bodies. Consciousness can perceive beyond the range of physical instruments.

What if a street bum, begging you for money, offhandedly comments that he can observe the universe though his subtle body and that his consciousness can perceive beyond the range of physical intruments.

Is there a way for you to decide if he's lying or telling the truth?

 

[George-ananda]

What if a street bum, begging you for money, offhandedly comments that he can observe the universe though his subtle body and that his consciousness can perceive beyond the range of physical intruments.

Is there a way for you to decide if he's lying or telling the truth?

Does his view match the repeated observations and teachings of many masters? Even if so, I would consider the possibility that he learned these things intellectually and was trying to impress me. If that's all I know, I couldn't conclude.

Now, if your next step is to say these masters I talk about are the same situation as the street bum, I wouldn't concur. The quality of their minds, efforts and character are known.

 

[idav]

I'll admit to not understanding much about higgs-boson; not many do. But, anyway it's still part of the gross physical plane that scientists explore. The subtle matter planes are of vibratory and dimensional aspects beyond our current ability to detect; think more like interpenetrating multiverses.

The higgs boson, and particles like it are the minutest vibration, a specific frequency, that is really what we are composed of. So the higgs is a detection of what your describing as "subtle matter planes are of vibratory and dimensional aspects.............".

 

[idav]

These days I just don't believe in God the way I used to believe in Santa. I believe the stories to be based on the some truth trying to be expressed. Maybe Saint Nick was really a saint, idk, perhaps in a more naturalistic manner. I believe in a natural saint the same as there is a natural god. The saint managed to exemplify teachings of compassion and love that Jesus expressed, so much that they made a holiday out of it, it is sad that sometimes greed takes over the real meaning of that particular holiday. So in a way this saint did miracles and it is something that anyone can do.

 

[George-ananda]

The higgs boson, and particles like it are the minutest vibration, a specific frequency, that is really what we are composed of. So the higgs is a detection of what your describing as "subtle matter planes are of vibratory and dimensional aspects.............".

I think dark matter (the majority of the universe) is more what I was talking about than higgs boson

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Does his view match the repeated observations and teachings of many masters? Even if so, I would consider the possibility that he learned these things intellectually and was trying to impress me. If that's all I know, I couldn't conclude.

Now, if your next step is to say these masters I talk about are the same situation as the street bum, I wouldn't concur. The quality of their minds, efforts and character are known.

Are known? I'm not sure what you mean. I don't know anything special about the minds of the masters. My guess is that only their acolytes, only the faithful, know about the qualities of the masters.

But I could be wrong about that. Who else knows that the masters can see stuff which regular people can't?

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

We have historical evidence that Jesus Christ was crucified and rose from the dead three days later. If that isn't a miracle, then I don't know what is.

 

[George-ananda]

Are known? I'm not sure what you mean. I don't know anything special about the minds of the masters. My guess is that only their acolytes, only the faithful, know about the qualities of the masters.

But I could be wrong about that. Who else knows that the masters can see stuff which regular people can't?

We are talking here of the authors of the Vedas (the scriptures of India/Hinduism) that have been around for ages and form the underpinnings of one of the great philosophies of the world. The adherents include some of the great minds of science too.

I personally am influenced by modern gurus/teachers; two in particular. If any of my debating partners want to go out of their comfort zone, read the 'Autobiography of a Yogi' by Prahmahansa Yogananda. Steve Jobs made sure he read this once a year to keep grounded.