Miracles

[shunyadragon]

In your opinion of course

Actually no, I am describing the actual problematic egocentric human claims of arbitrary healing, and not my opinion.

What you are expressing is an opinion of arbitrary claim of one miracle, and not the issue on the larger scale,

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

In my work I seen that people who have hope tend to be way happier. Sadly today many of those who are antagonistic and angry towards people with religious believes are people who are hurt. No all of course but many.

Are you sure you've got the causality arrow going the right way? Is it that people who have hope are happier, or people who are happy have hope? What evidence do you have that Hope = Happy, and not that Happy = Hope. Or that the relationship between happiness and hope is mediated on a third (or more), unidentified cause?

What about those (that is, the religious) who are antagonistic and angry toward people without religious beliefs? I rather suspect that there is a lack of citable evidence that the only people who are Angry and Antagonistic toward religion/the religious have been hurt by religion and/or people who are religious. Surely, those religious people who are Angry and Antagonistic about atheists and other religions are that way because they have been hurt by them...or is there some other explanation for their anger and antagonism? Or maybe you are saying that religious people are never angry or antagonistic towards the nonreligious, or followers of other religions?

On the other hand, I would expect that the more general observation would be true, that Being Hurt leads BOTH the religious and nonreligious to be Angry and Antagonistic towards the group/s that have hurt them. In general. Not all of them, of course.

 

[Trackdayguy]

Are you sure you've got the causality arrow going the right way? Is it that people who have hope are happier, or people who are happy have hope? What evidence do you have that Hope = Happy, and not that Happy = Hope. Or that the relationship between happiness and hope is mediated on a third (or more), unidentified cause?

What about those (that is, the religious) who are antagonistic and angry toward people without religious beliefs? I rather suspect that there is a lack of citable evidence that the only people who are Angry and Antagonistic toward religion/the religious have been hurt by religion and/or people who are religious. Surely, those religious people who are Angry and Antagonistic about atheists and other religions are that way because they have been hurt by them...or is there some other explanation for their anger and antagonism? Or maybe you are saying that religious people are never angry or antagonistic towards the nonreligious, or followers of other religions?

On the other hand, I would expect that the more general observation would be true, that Being Hurt leads BOTH the religious and nonreligious to be Angry and Antagonistic towards the group/s that have hurt them. In general. Not all of them, of course.

If the weather forecast in your area says its raining and you looking out the window and its a blight blue sunny day, what are you going to believe.

 

[Kenny]

It issue is the arbitrary egocentric claims of healing by humans, not God.

IYHO

I prefer just reading what happened in the NT and learn from it.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

If the weather forecast in your area says its raining and you looking out the window and its a blight blue sunny day, what are you going to believe.

Nice attempt at deflection. You haven't responded to my points, certainly not to show that you have a reasoned basis for your assertions...except that you (apparently) think the analogy about the weather means something...and it may, to you...but it most certainly is not relevant to me and the discussion of what you asserted.

 

[shunyadragon]

If the weather forecast in your area says its raining and you looking out the window and its a blight blue sunny day, what are you going to believe.

I have a heavy background in meteorology and climatology, and you stepping way outside the topic and bringing in issues of objective verifiable observations of natural events, and not remotely related to the problematic history of claims of Divine intervention as healing miracles,

The word immediately following miracle in the dictionary is mirage.

 

[shunyadragon]

IYHO

I prefer just reading what happened in the NT and learn from it.

OK! but citing anecdotal historical claims, which may be true or not, does nothing here concerning the arbitrary egocentric claims of the miraculous, which by facts only arbitrarily may occur sometimes, but most of time it does not just as in the natural course of events..

 

[Trackdayguy]

I have a heavy background in meteorology and climatology, and you stepping way outside the topic and bringing in issues of objective verifiable observations of natural events, and not remotely related to the problematic history of claims of Divine intervention as healing miracles,

The word immediately following miracle in the dictionary is mirage.

Im happy sir for you to believe whatever it is you choose, makes no difference to me nor does it change my experience.

 

[Kenny]

OK! but citing anecdotal historical claims, which may be true or not, does nothing here concerning the arbitrary egocentric claims of the miraculous, which by facts only arbitrarily may occur sometimes, but most of time it does not just as in the natural course of events..

However, labeling it an "egocentric claims" is an "egocentric" position. You may call it anecdotal historical claims, but I see it as a multiplicity of witnesses that wrote it down like a policeman taking down statements.

It is the jury that decides whether it is anecdotal or historical. This juror says it is historical and applicable . You are welcome to be a juror of a different position.

It sure has helped me.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I thought I made it clear that we didn't know how it happened.

People hear what they want based on their own agendas, filters, hurt and prejudice. So one happens to mention prayer or God in any sentence and it creates all sorts of reactions in those who for what ever reason have a problem with God and prayer. People have an issue with God, Christianity, prayer or what ever its none of my concern. People can believe whatever they want.

See? It is possible to make comments without denigrating the person you are commenting about.

The above is a very good example of this.

But consistently calling anyone who criticizes your posts "evil" and "twisted", is not.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Sadly today many of those who are antagonistic and angry towards people with religious believes are people who are hurt. No all of course but many.

Can you really blame them? Once a person discovers that he's been systematically lied to over most of his or her life, and that the lies were deliberate and harmful?

That does tend to create some anger....

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

.
I'd really like to see someone DESIGN a study that could measure the efficacy of prayer. I don't see it happening. For one thing, such a study would REQUIRE the willing participation and compliance of the patients, the people praying (or not...) and the deity to whom those prayers are aimed. Good luck with that.

It's been done-- multiple times-- and many included people who desperately wanted prayer to work.

But because they were honest scientists? They had to accept the conclusions that it simply does not.

Prayers are no different from not-praying, with respect to people getting over illness, disease or other ailments.

Which begs the question: WHY.

If god is 10% as GOOD as god-people INSIST?

There would be a MARKED IMPROVEMENT among patients who were prayed over, versus patients who were not.

There is no such improvement. Why? Why is this god who is supposedly good, deliberately hiding his "goodness"?

It's as if this god REFUSES to permit ANY evidence that might accidentally prove it existed...!

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

One thing I know... is God answer prayers

Why don't you pray that your god will prove himself to atheists, then?

Too much to ask?

Yeah....

If you only and ever pray for things that you know might come true anyway?

Well....

 

[Kenny]

Why don't you pray that your god will prove himself to atheists, then?

Too much to ask?

Yeah....

If you only and ever pray for things that you know might come true anyway?

Well....

not at all... Can and will do. But how many times have things been right under your nose and you didn't see it? The problem wasn't the answer but in the seeing. If you don't want to see it... you won't.

 

[Kenny]

It's been done-- multiple times-- and many included people who desperately wanted prayer to work.

But because they were honest scientists? They had to accept the conclusions that it simply does not.

Prayers are no different from not-praying, with respect to people getting over illness, disease or other ailments.

Which begs the question: WHY.

If god is 10% as GOOD as god-people INSIST?

There would be a MARKED IMPROVEMENT among patients who were prayed over, versus patients who were not.

There is no such improvement. Why? Why is this god who is supposedly good, deliberately hiding his "goodness"?

It's as if this god REFUSES to permit ANY evidence that might accidentally prove it existed...!

It is interesting how one can answer their own question they way they want to answer it

Have you ever given an advise to help someone and they didn't receive it?

I remember asking someone at the hospital... "Would you like me to pray for you?"... His answer "no".

No amount of prayer can work if they don't want the prayer. It is call free-will that even God won't violate.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

not at all... Can and will do. But how many times have things been right under your nose and you didn't see it? The problem wasn't the answer but in the seeing. If you don't want to see it... you won't.

How.... convenient. I'm very observant. But if you really mean that people have to be delusional before they "see" these "miracles"?

Sure. That fits quite well-- in fact, that does fit with all the objective observational information we have.

But I do appreciate your ability to read minds, and how you magically know that I want.

The problem is? You could not be more wrong: I, for one, would LOVE -- absolutely ADORE if there was a God who was OmniGood.

This would alleviate a great deal of Things To Worry About, such as the Ultimate Fate of Humankind.

Sadly? There remains no convincing evidence of any such thing-- proof?

All the God-Preventable Evil on Earth. The god you claim is good? Simply is no such thing.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

It is interesting how one can answer their own question they way they want to answer it

Except that isn't what actually happened! Several studies the people who commissioned the study *desperately* wanted prayer to WORK.

AND IT DID NOT.

Ooops! That kinda makes your claim 100% false, above...

Have you ever given an advise to help someone and they didn't receive it?

Not all "advice" is valid, useful or even kind-- in fact, much such "advice" is thinly veiled criticism or worse-- hate speech re-packaged as "truth".

I find this is most especially true coming from people who believe they are "speaking for god".

I
I remember asking someone at the hospital... "Would you like me to pray for you?"... His answer "no".

No amount of prayer can work if they don't want the prayer. It is call free-will that even God won't violate.

I bet you prayed for them anyway. So much for your over-used "free will" meme.

And so much for your All Good "god"-- he lets them die to SPITE them, then?

Wow..... even a Doctor in a Hospital has superior morality than THAT!

 

[Kenny]

Except that isn't what actually happened! Several studies the people who commissioned the study *desperately* wanted prayer to WORK.

AND IT DID NOT.

Ooops! That kinda makes your claim 100% false, above...

!

That erroneous statement has been thoroughly discussed previously in this post.

!

Not all "advice" is valid, useful or even kind-- in fact, much such "advice" is thinly veiled criticism or worse-- hate speech re-packaged as "truth".
!

That was a good effort at evading both the question and the analogy.

!

I find this is most especially true coming from people who believe they are "speaking for god".
!

Yes... there are times when people say something in the name of God and it isn't. But that isn't what I said.

!

I bet you prayed for them anyway. So much for your over-used "free will" meme.
!

Actually... In this case I didn't. Why do something that I know would be fruitless?

!

And so much for your All Good "god"-- he lets them die to SPITE them, then?

Wow..... even a Doctor in a Hospital has superior morality than THAT!

Have you noticed that we all die?

do you have a coherent train of thought?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

That erroneous statement has been thoroughly discussed previously in this post.

Yes-- your post was thoroughly refuted, by multiple sources, all of which you ignored.

What was that you said? Only "seeing" what you want to "see"?

!
That was a good effort at evading both the question and the analogy.

I evaded nothing. I refuted your statement quite well-- but you refuse to see once again.

!
Yes... there are times when people say something in the name of God and it isn't. But that isn't what I said.

Well, since we have exactly NOTHING from any actual gods?

All we have are people speaking FOR god, don't we? Funny how that works-- god cannot manage to leave as much as a single voicemail, press conference, world-wide announcement or anything else remotely godlike.

Why? And more importantly, who are YOU to Judge who speaks for gods and who doesn't?

Actually... In this case I didn't. Why do something that I know would be fruitless?

Indeed. The irony of your statement here is.... deep. But I doubt you can "see" why...

!
Have you noticed that we all die?

So? What's your point? Did you have a coherent point to make? No?

Yeah...

do you have a coherent train of thought?

Nice! Very nice! When losing an argument-- stoop to insulting people ....

I love it when theists make atheists into the nice one.

 

[Kenny]

Yes-- your post was thoroughly refuted, by multiple sources, all of which you ignored.

What was that you said? Only "seeing" what you want to "see"?

I evaded nothing. I refuted your statement quite well-- but you refuse to see once again.

Well, since we have exactly NOTHING from any actual gods?

All we have are people speaking FOR god, don't we? Funny how that works-- god cannot manage to leave as much as a single voicemail, press conference, world-wide announcement or anything else remotely godlike.

Why? And more importantly, who are YOU to Judge who speaks for gods and who doesn't?

Indeed. The irony of your statement here is.... deep. But I doubt you can "see" why...

So? What's your point? Did you have a coherent point to make? No?

Yeah...

Nice! Very nice! When losing an argument-- stoop to insulting people ....

I love it when theists make atheists into the nice one.

Thank you for leaving a smile on my face!