Miracles are non-existent by their very definition

[McBell]

I do suppose people can see miracles in different ways. However, normally a miracle is seen as a supernatural act that can only be done by a deity. The idea of supernatural is where the problem is. Nothing that is outside the laws of nature never has or can possibly happen, and the implications of that on the likelihood of God existing is devastating. Now, if we define a miracle simply as something that happens against the odds, or simply one specific outcome happening out of many possibilities, then yes miracles exist. Almost everything can be seen as a miracle in this case, which is a nice way to view life. The disappointing thing is there is still no God involved in such miracles.

Why are you stuck on the second definition of the word:

"WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006)"

miracle
n 1: any amazing or wonderful occurrence
2: a marvellous event manifesting a supernatural act of a divine
agent
​

I would have to say that definition number one fits most usage of the word.

 

[McBell]

You can't disprove God.

It's just never going to happen.

Sad that the best you can do is believe something that cannot be disproven.
pray tell, do you take the same stance with leprechauns, unicorns, fairies, etc.?
Why not?

 

[ChristineES]

Good point. I think our minds have a hard time intuitively grasping the mathematics of probability.

I was thinking more along the lines of each person's chances rather than 100 people getting a disease and 99 die and one lives.

If someone is in a coma, and has a very small chance of coming back-- it is called a miracle by people and they will see it as such. If a doctor tells a patient that he or she will never walk again and the patient-- after a lot of work-- does indeed walk again may see that as a miracle despite all the work; after all, the doctor said "never". Some people wouldn't see that as a miracle but the result of a lot of hard work and the fact that the doctor was wrong in the first place. And it does seem supernatural to beat odds like that. But it isn't really supernatural. And we theists would see it as God's intervention.

 

[fantome profane]

So what about the reverse. What do you think about a situation where medically there is only a very small chance of death? Consider a case where the medical experts say there is only a .001% chance of death, and then the person dies. Is this also a miracle? Should this also be considered "God's intervention"?

 

[NIX]

So what about the reverse. What do you think about a situation where medically there is only a very small chance of death? Consider a case where the medical experts say there is only a .001% chance of death, and then the person dies. Is this also a miracle? Should this also be considered "God's intervention"?

Consistancy would make it a curse, but people like to see their god as intervening only in good ways, so they will explain it differently.

 

[Quintessence]

I think it is wise here to remember there are two kinds of miracles.

Strong miracles are the sorts of events that violate laws of physics and of nature. These are the ones that are "supernatural." These are the ones spoken of in mythological tales that were, in all likelihood, not intended to be taken literally in the first place.

Weak miracles are the sorts of events that stay within the laws of physics and of nature. These are the ones that could be called "preternatural." They are events that are abnormal and/or awe-inspiring, such as an event with a low probability of occurrence.

Weak miracles happen all the time. Strong miracles are mythological.

 

[Willamena]

Why are you stuck on the second definition of the word:

"WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006)"

miracle
n 1: any amazing or wonderful occurrence
2: a marvellous event manifesting a supernatural act of a divine
agent
​

I would have to say that definition number one fits most usage of the word.

That's no accident. The dictionary lists them in order of common usage.

 

[cyberman]

The fact that I am exactly the way I am right now could be considered a miracle

And, the Modesty 2012 award goes to..

Only joking - I have selected a partial sentence which gives a false impression of what TDOP was saying.

TDOP, unless I am misreading you, your OP is simply an assertion of your belief that there is nothing supernatural - is that right?

 

[1137]

And, the Modesty 2012 award goes to..

Only joking - I have selected a partial sentence which gives a false impression of what TDOP was saying.

TDOP, unless I am misreading you, your OP is simply an assertion of your belief that there is nothing supernatural - is that right?

Haha that is a very good example of why contex is important. Yes, this is mainly about that supernatural events do not exist, and that is the common religious view of miracles. However, it is also about how the idea of miracles may be misleading for the same reasons.

 

[Falvlun]

Oxford defines "nature" by it`s physical aspects.

In other words, anything non-physical can be said to be "super"natural according to oxford.

Anything non-physical? What about emotions? What about relationships or beauty or ideals?

Definitions are good and well, but if they are cherry picked to create meanings contrary to the common understanding, than they aren't very useful.

I was thinking more along the lines of each person's chances rather than 100 people getting a disease and 99 die and one lives.

If someone is in a coma, and has a very small chance of coming back-- it is called a miracle by people and they will see it as such. If a doctor tells a patient that he or she will never walk again and the patient-- after a lot of work-- does indeed walk again may see that as a miracle despite all the work; after all, the doctor said "never". Some people wouldn't see that as a miracle but the result of a lot of hard work and the fact that the doctor was wrong in the first place. And it does seem supernatural to beat odds like that. But it isn't really supernatural. And we theists would see it as God's intervention.

Can't see much to disagree with there.

 

[Me Myself]

Anything non-physical? What about emotions? What about relationships or beauty or ideals?

Definitions are good and well, but if they are cherry picked to create meanings contrary to the common understanding, than they aren't very useful.

Emotins are chemicals in our brains. If you are talking about the PERCEPTION of such emotions in the way we know is well beyond language to pin point, then yes, if some "love" that cannot be traced in any physical phenomena causes some physical change, then I would deem it supernatural.

 

[ChristineES]

So what about the reverse. What do you think about a situation where medically there is only a very small chance of death? Consider a case where the medical experts say there is only a .001% chance of death, and then the person dies. Is this also a miracle? Should this also be considered "God's intervention"?

Truthfully, I said nothing about God's intervention when talking of a miracle. If a person dies when there was a 99.9% of he or she surviving, then I suppose you could call that a miracle, too. But the family of the person isn't going to think so.

I think I was trying to say what people perceive as a miracle may not even be one. I do believe God does indeed intervene for certain people for reasons only known to God, but not all things we call "God intervention" really are- but they are going to appear so if a person beats the odds to him or herself and to his or her loved ones.

 

[MoonWater]

I was thinking more along the lines of each person's chances rather than 100 people getting a disease and 99 die and one lives.

If someone is in a coma, and has a very small chance of coming back-- it is called a miracle by people and they will see it as such. If a doctor tells a patient that he or she will never walk again and the patient-- after a lot of work-- does indeed walk again may see that as a miracle despite all the work; after all, the doctor said "never". Some people wouldn't see that as a miracle but the result of a lot of hard work and the fact that the doctor was wrong in the first place. And it does seem supernatural to beat odds like that. But it isn't really supernatural. And we theists would see it as God's intervention.

Almost the exact same thing happened with my mom. After her stroke doctors said she would be bed ridden the rest of her life. That was 22 years ago and today she still needs a wheelchair but she is by no means bed ridden, far from it. She is the reason I am in early childhood education today and her hard work and determination have been a major inspiration. I wouldn't necessarily attribute it to "god's intervention" but I would still call it a "miracle", and not a "weak miracle" either.

Besides God has already given us a definition of miracle to go by:
"Parting a bowl of soup is not a miracle Bruce, it's a magic trick. A single mom who's working two jobs, and still finds time to take her son to soccer practice, that's a miracle. A teenager who says "no" to drugs and "yes" to an education, that's a miracle. People want me to do everything for them. What they don't realize is *they* have the power."
Morgan Friedman as God in Bruce Almighty

This is the definition of miracle I go by and I would actually put "mythological miracles" under the title of "magic tricks" as well, not to belittle them, but because I think it is far more descriptive of what they actually are.

I also dislike the term supernatural. I don't think anything, no matter how powerful or wacky or whatever could actually fit the definition of the word, unless you subscribe to the idea that god or other spiritual matters are separate from nature (which I don't) and even then it would be pushing it.

 

[Willamena]

Emotins are chemicals in our brains.

Beauty/relation isn't. To address things physically is to fail to address them non-phsyically. All you're doing is being selective in how you choose to address them.

 

[fantome profane]

Beauty/relation isn't. To address things physically is to fail to address them non-phsyically. All you're doing is being selective in how you choose to address them.

we all make selections.

 

[Falvlun]

Emotins are chemicals in our brains. If you are talking about the PERCEPTION of such emotions in the way we know is well beyond language to pin point, then yes, if some "love" that cannot be traced in any physical phenomena causes some physical change, then I would deem it supernatural.

If you can point to a molecule and show that it is love, and that one is anger, and this one is jealousy, or if you can show another one that is an idea or the concept of beauty, then I think you'd probably win a Nobel.

What about time? Show me what atoms make up a second.

And why would you deem it supernatural, even though such things clearly exist in nature? Isn't it a little silly to cling to a definition of natural that clearly ignores a whole spectrum of natural, nonphysical concepts?

 

[Willamena]

we all make selections.

Some of us are aware of it, though.

 

[jtartar]

I do suppose people can see miracles in different ways. However, normally a miracle is seen as a supernatural act that can only be done by a deity. The idea of supernatural is where the problem is. Nothing that is outside the laws of nature never has or can possibly happen, and the implications of that on the likelihood of God existing is devastating. Now, if we define a miracle simply as something that happens against the odds, or simply one specific outcome happening out of many possibilities, then yes miracles exist. Almost everything can be seen as a miracle in this case, which is a nice way to view life. The disappointing thing is there is still no God involved in such miracles.

The Doors of Perception,
It seems that you have a terrible case of Egocentric Perdicament. When a man that has so little knowledge tries to reason on something in his own mind, that is so much greater than himself, can he come up with an answer greater than what his own mind that is so limited in knowledge,knows?
For an example; how could you, whoever you are, decide that there is no God??
According to the Bible, only a senseless one says that, Ps 14:1. The reason could possibly be that he has really made no search, as the Bible also says, Ps 10:4.
There are really two ways a person can SEE God. One is by Revealed Religion and the other is by Natural Religion. Natural Religion is what we see in natural things. The Bible says that a person is indefensible for not believing in God, because of the things He has made, Rom 1:18-32. I hope you are not of these ones listed here.
Mathematicians have studied the chance of things being as they are in the universe without there being a Superior mind behind the Cosmos. The chances they came up with was 1 chance to the number of all the atoms in the visible universe.
Revealed Religion is what we find written down about religious things. There is no equal to the Holy Scriptures, The Bible. The Bible is the only book that gives us satisfying answers to all the questions a person might ask, such as about the earth, how we came to be alive, why we die, the great thing that God has done to redeem us again to Himself, what is death, is there hope for a life after death, why is there so much suffering. No other book tells us the answers to these things.
The Bible itself is a miracle!!! It was written by 40 men over a period of 1,610 years, and is still more up to date than any book on earth. The Bible is almost one third prophecy, some that were fulfilled very quickly some over thousands of years, some even that we are eyewitnesses of their fulfillment. NO man, or group of men can even tell you accurrately what will happen tomorrow. When the Bible mentions scientific things it is inerrantly accurrate, even though no man on earth knew the things written at the time they were written.
Speaking about natural laws; what man knows all the laws that God has put into nature??? There is a term called Anomy, which means something that happened, for which there is no known law. Does man's lack of knowledge limit God's? Remember that God is perfect in knowledge, Job 37:16.
One thing you want to recognize is that no wicked ones will understand, Dan 12:10.
Make sure you are not in that category. The Bible even says; though the wicked are shone favor, they simply will not learn, Isa 26:10.