• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Let's talk miracles...

McBell

Admiral Obvious
1. Do you believe there is such a thing as miracles?
Yes

2. What are miracles and how do you separate them from other rare, but natural, fortunate events?
A miracle is any amazing or wonderful occurrence.
There is no need for a "miracle" to be supernatural, rare, fortunate, unlikely, etc..
All it needs to be a miracle is be amazing and or wonderful.

3. What is the justification for calling something a miracle?
that I find it amazing and or wonderful.



"WordNet (r) 2.0"
miracle
n 1: any amazing or wonderful occurrence
2: a marvellous event manifesting a supernatural act of God
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
Heh, interesting. I think I vaguely alluded to this possibility (former greatness of magic that has gone into decline or been sucked out of the world) earlier in the thread, but I forget. It's entirely possible, but we'd have no way of knowing for certain if this is true or not. Either way, as a Neopagan who does work with the concept of magic and/or spellcraft, I think I understand where you're coming from here. At the same time, I sometimes feel suggesting that mere humans have that kind of power (or ever did) is hubris and an affront to the gods.
Well, deep as my neopagan roots go, the label doesn't quite fit anymore. :)

One of the big reasons for that is that I no longer believe the Gods are... well, Gods. Just another form of life.
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
OK.

So, while I don't believe in the supernatural, I do believe in the art of magic. I realize that will almost certainly confuse some people, however explaining would totally hijack the thread. If you really must know, start a spin off topic, please. :)

Anyway, the nutshell version is that magic is the deliberate application of raw consciousness to shape the world. I believe it has declined steadily over the centuries, in part because as science progresses, skepticism and disbelief rise.

The thing is, the capacity of magic is intimately linked to the deepest levels of belief. Wholly dependent on them, in fact, because the witch or deity shaping the spell borrows the energy of other life forms. If the energy we seek to tap is unwilling, it is denied. Belief is not the power source, but the power's gatekeeper.

So, as more and more people disbelieve, the available energy has declined sharply. I believe that in the days of the ancients, even the amateur hedge witch could shape wonders that would astonish our modern minds. Now, the most powerful energy shaper on the planet is limited to subtle things easily dismissed.

Questions, comments, confusion? :p


I basicaly agree :D
 

Awoon

Well-Known Member
I have a few questions regarding this...

1. Do you believe there is such a thing as miracles?

2. What are miracles and how do you separate them from other rare, but natural, fortunate events?

3. What is the justification for calling something a miracle?


Miracle is an out of the ordinary happening. IE Jesus feeding 4000/5000. People carried food with them and when they saw Jesus handing out food from a donator they then donated the food they were carrying. So they had a pot luck lunch with everyone sharing their food.

Hence the miracle was getting people to share their food.
 

jarofthoughts

Empirical Curmudgeon
Miracle is an out of the ordinary happening. IE Jesus feeding 4000/5000. People carried food with them and when they saw Jesus handing out food from a donator they then donated the food they were carrying. So they had a pot luck lunch with everyone sharing their food.

Hence the miracle was getting people to share their food.

I've never heard that interpretation of that story before but I kinda like it, and for some reason that would, in my eyes, make Jesus a lot more impressive than if he just simply poofed the food into existence. :D
 

outhouse

Atheistically
I have a few questions regarding this...

1. Do you believe there is such a thing as miracles?

2. What are miracles and how do you separate them from other rare, but natural, fortunate events?

3. What is the justification for calling something a miracle?

1 No

2 they are mythology

3 some lucky guess percieved as supernaturally driven
 

fosterjonnie

New Member
I believed there is, when you’re on the point of life that seems hopeless and you know that only God can do it. Ask a person who suffered from chronic illness that even medical professionals gave up and just by turning to God got healed. Luck can’t save a life, only miracles can.
 

jarofthoughts

Empirical Curmudgeon
I believed there is, when you’re on the point of life that seems hopeless and you know that only God can do it. Ask a person who suffered from chronic illness that even medical professionals gave up and just by turning to God got healed. Luck can’t save a life, only miracles can.

So, let me see if I get this right:
You're saying that every time someone get's well and we can't explain why, that's a miracle and a result of godly intervention?
That means that every time someone dies or gets ill and we can't explain why, that must also be a result of godly intervention.
And in consequence, since we knew much less in earlier times than we know now, that miracles happened a lot more often in the past than they do now, and that as our knowledge increases, miracles will continue to become exceedingly rare.

Do you see where you went wrong? :D
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
So, let me see if I get this right:
You're saying that every time someone get's well and we can't explain why, that's a miracle and a result of godly intervention?
That means that every time someone dies or gets ill and we can't explain why, that must also be a result of godly intervention.
And in consequence, since we knew much less in earlier times than we know now, that miracles happened a lot more often in the past than they do now, and that as our knowledge increases, miracles will continue to become exceedingly rare.

Do you see where you went wrong? :D
You're getting your posters confused, sweetie. :) This:
And in consequence, since we knew much less in earlier times than we know now, that miracles happened a lot more often in the past than they do now, and that as our knowledge increases, miracles will continue to become exceedingly rare.
was all me.
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
Quite possible. I do sometimes get confused. ;)
But do you think our points were the same even if what we said was quite similar?
:confused: You didn't even respond to my post. (I feel quite snubbed by that, btw. :sad:) I don't know why you attributed my answer to someone who didn't address the question. And now I'm very confused. :confused:
 

jarofthoughts

Empirical Curmudgeon
:confused: You didn't even respond to my post. (I feel quite snubbed by that, btw. :sad:) I don't know why you attributed my answer to someone who didn't address the question. And now I'm very confused. :confused:

Right.
Now I -really- am confused.

I was being sarcastic in my post to fosterjonnie, and I'm not at all certain how I have snubbed you, but I assure you that it was unintentional. :)
If you can direct me to the post you're referring to, I'll be happy to respond.
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
Right.
Now I -really- am confused.

I was being sarcastic in my post to fosterjonnie, and I'm not at all certain how I have snubbed you, but I assure you that it was unintentional. :)
If you can direct me to the post you're referring to, I'll be happy to respond.
Oh, I was teasing about the snubbing. And I didn't realize you were being sarcastic, either. Miscommunication abounds... I blame lack of sleep and abundance of caffeine.

I will dig up a link to the post, though. Stand by.


ETA: here you go. Sorry again.
 

jarofthoughts

Empirical Curmudgeon
Oh, I was teasing about the snubbing. And I didn't realize you were being sarcastic, either. Miscommunication abounds... I blame lack of sleep and abundance of caffeine.

I will dig up a link to the post, though. Stand by.


ETA: here you go. Sorry again.

Ah!
I thought you had a conversation going with Quintessence on this, but I'll be happy to provide my two cents as well. :)
 

jarofthoughts

Empirical Curmudgeon
OK.

So, while I don't believe in the supernatural, I do believe in the art of magic. I realize that will almost certainly confuse some people, however explaining would totally hijack the thread. If you really must know, start a spin off topic, please. :)

Anyway, the nutshell version is that magic is the deliberate application of raw consciousness to shape the world. I believe it has declined steadily over the centuries, in part because as science progresses, skepticism and disbelief rise.

The thing is, the capacity of magic is intimately linked to the deepest levels of belief. Wholly dependent on them, in fact, because the witch or deity shaping the spell borrows the energy of other life forms. If the energy we seek to tap is unwilling, it is denied. Belief is not the power source, but the power's gatekeeper.

So, as more and more people disbelieve, the available energy has declined sharply. I believe that in the days of the ancients, even the amateur hedge witch could shape wonders that would astonish our modern minds. Now, the most powerful energy shaper on the planet is limited to subtle things easily dismissed.

Questions, comments, confusion? :p

As a curmudgeonly empiricist, I do have some issues with this view, as you might imagine. ;)
Not problems with you holding this view; that is of course entirely up to you, but rather problems with the basis, or lack thereof, for holding it.
I know that for a lot of people the constant call for evidence gets tiresome, but for me that is really the only way I'd buy into any of this.
And to be fair, there is no evidence to support neither that the consciousness forms the world in any way except perhaps psychologically (I really hope you're not a fan of Deepak Choprah), nor of any such source of power, again except perhaps on a psychological level.
And the fact remains that science works.
In fact it works better than any idea that we humans have come up with in the entire span of history.

And that is why, tiresome as it may be, I still have to ask for evidence before I'll even consider any such concepts. :)
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
As a curmudgeonly empiricist, I do have some issues with this view, as you might imagine. ;)
Not problems with you holding this view; that is of course entirely up to you, but rather problems with the basis, or lack thereof, for holding it.
I know that for a lot of people the constant call for evidence gets tiresome, but for me that is really the only way I'd buy into any of this.
And to be fair, there is no evidence to support neither that the consciousness forms the world in any way except perhaps psychologically (I really hope you're not a fan of Deepak Choprah), nor of any such source of power, again except perhaps on a psychological level.
And the fact remains that science works.
In fact it works better than any idea that we humans have come up with in the entire span of history.

And that is why, tiresome as it may be, I still have to ask for evidence before I'll even consider any such concepts. :)
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a concept without believing it." :p

I'm not asking you to believe, simply entertain long enough to have a discussion. We both know there's no hard data on this. :)

ETA: As for Chopra, I know the name, that's it.
 

jarofthoughts

Empirical Curmudgeon
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a concept without believing it." :p

I have no problem entertaining it, but I run into a few bumps in the road rather early on as to how this would work. ;)

I'm not asking you to believe, simply entertain long enough to have a discussion. We both know there's no hard data on this. :)

What you are describing is, in short, a world in which Marketing people would be (some) of the most powerful people around.
And that sounds terrible...kind like it is now actually. :p
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
I have no problem entertaining it, but I run into a few bumps in the road rather early on as to how this would work. ;)



What you are describing is, in short, a world in which Marketing people would be (some) of the most powerful people around.
And that sounds terrible...kind like it is now actually. :p
LOL!

I'm trying to catch up after being on a plane for 10 hours. Why don't you elaborate?
 

jarofthoughts

Empirical Curmudgeon
LOL!

I'm trying to catch up after being on a plane for 10 hours. Why don't you elaborate?

Well, what you're essentially saying is that life-force, freely given, is the source of power in this equation. That means that it is the interest of the powers that be to keep the public as compliant as possible, probably through keeping them ignorant and/or on drugs, to maximize that potential.
Secondly, you say that faith is the gateway through which this power is accessed, meaning that whoever controls this now massive source of power would probably be extremely delusional and/or rock stupid, thus being capable of believing just about anything.
It stands to reason that this would also likely be a person with an aptitude for marketing since he/she would have to convince people to give up their life-force freely.

So, what we end up with is a delusional marketing executive ruling an ignorant and drug induced public to create the most messed up reality imaginable.

In other words, pretty much how things are now. :D
 
Top