Can Miracles Happen

[say1988]

You would likely need at least two, since it will likely take multiple generations.
Theoretically it would occur with enough attempts, so long as the monkeys figure out how to type, since there are only so many permutations of X number of letters. The odds of it occuring in nay one attempt are infinitesimal, though.

 

[Bluemofia]

You would likely need at least two, since it will likely take multiple generations.
Theoretically it would occur with enough attempts, so long as the monkeys figure out how to type, since there are only so many permutations of X number of letters. The odds of it occuring in nay one attempt are infinitesimal, though.

With an infinite amount of monkeys, the infinitesimal probability becomes 1.
Same goes with an immortal monkey typing away at a single typewriter for infinite time.

Much like the lottery can be won, but an individual's chance of winning it is so small, they would have to play for a very long time, or buy a lot of tickets to win it.

 

[sophie]

and your explanation for what happened is?

Luck perhaps? Coincidence? Are you honestly proscribing an outlier recovery to some sort of divine intervention?

If you do believe the above, then what do you say to the multitudinous people who also pray for the recoveries of their loved ones, and yet find those prayers in vain?

Moreover, what do you say to the people who die from appendectomies? That's also highly unlikely, is that also a miracle?

 

[Birdjaguar]

Luck perhaps? Coincidence? Are you honestly proscribing an outlier recovery to some sort of divine intervention?

If you do believe the above, then what do you say to the multitudinous people who also pray for the recoveries of their loved ones, and yet find those prayers in vain?

Moreover, what do you say to the people who die from appendectomies? That's also highly unlikely, is that also a miracle?

Highly improbable events that cannot be explained. A failed appendectomy can usually be explained.

If one assumes that god exists, but refrains from assigning any specific characteristics to it, then highly improbable events that cannot be explained could be one way it interacts with the world. The good ones might be called "miracles", the less good ones "fate". The "coincidence" label is an equally biased appellation.

 

[Flying Pig]

Yesterday I was reading through 'ask a theologian' which I have to say is probably the best thread on this forum. There was an interesting thing about the power of God, and one Plot's answers (apologies if I've got this wrong, Plot) was 'omnipotent means that if it is possible, God can do it'. So if curing an injury will inevitably mean you will die, God cannot cure it. Likewise he cannot create a rock that he cannot lift, because such a rock is impossible. Even more likewise, there's still a point in praying because he cannot tell the future, so he hasn't decided on the minutae of it.

On the question of 'why doesn't God heal amputees': If we say that God hears and answers prayers, then we have to think of how we see God. If we see him as the father, then it becomes quite clear. A priest once asked somebody, in response to 'if God loves us, why does he let us suffer', 'would you let your son go bungee-jumping if he wanted to?' 'Yes, father' 'even though he might be seriously hurt or even die, through no fault of his own' 'Yes father, but I don't see...'

The same logic holds. I don't think anybody here growing up, even if they had parents who had the means to do so (mine certainly didn't), was granted everything they asked for. You parents understood that living life knowing that you can always have what you want is no way to really live it. I don't pretend to know how God's mind works, but perhaps he wants them to be an example to others by their overcoming of obstacles?

Also, by curing them there would be no doubt that he existed, since only God could do that. One of his rules of engagement, if he's there, is that there will never be any proof of his existance. Otherwise, we wouldn't have total free will and would be hugely obliged to live a Christian life, knowing for sure that he was watching, and his great gift to us (apart from the whole redemption/Jesus business) is free will.

 

[Cu Chulainn]

Also, by curing them there would be no doubt that he existed, since only God could do that. One of his rules of engagement, if he's there, is that there will never be any proof of his existance. Otherwise, we wouldn't have total free will and would be hugely obliged to live a Christian life, knowing for sure that he was watching, and his great gift to us (apart from the whole redemption/Jesus business) is free will.

Those poor Apostles! No free will to believe or not. Not to mention Moses, and Noah and every other biblical character. The free will justification for the weakening of miracles has always been a ridiculous canard that falls apart under the slightest scrutiny. All one has to do to prove that God has no qualms about proving his existence is: read the Bible.

The fact that the strength and obviousness of miracles has decreased as documentation methods have improved has only two possible explanations.
1. God is camera shy.
2. There were never any miracles to begin with.

 

[azzaman333]

No, miracles do not happen.

This.

 

[Flying Pig]

Those poor Apostles! No free will to believe or not. Not to mention Moses, and Noah and every other biblical character. The free will justification for the weakening of miracles has always been a ridiculous canard that falls apart under the slightest scrutiny. All one has to do to prove that God has no qualms about proving his existence is: read the Bible.

The fact that the strength and obviousness of miracles has decreased as documentation methods have improved has only two possible explanations.
1. God is camera shy.
2. There were never any miracles to begin with.

That's the old God, back when not knowing he existed may well hav meant you didn't go to heaven. Post-Christ, short of for the Apostles (whom he needed to spread the word without revealing himself beyond all doubt), he never actually proved that he was there (the Jews didn't believe that Jesus was his son, even when he performed his miracles, and he refused to prove it in front of everyone when the Devil tempted him to). Now that it doesn't matter what you believe, he keeps free will intact

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

A priest once asked somebody, in response to 'if God loves us, why does he let us suffer', 'would you let your son go bungee-jumping if he wanted to?' 'Yes, father' 'even though he might be seriously hurt or even die, through no fault of his own' 'Yes father, but I don't see...'

But the dad can heal any injury and even reverse death.

 

[Flying Pig]

But only He could do that, which would prove that He existed. See my last post.

 

[emzie]

If miracles only happened to Christians, I would find that an interesting fact. By the OP's logic, if he were to read this page he should, if not convert to Hinduism, fusion some idea of a universal religion.

 

[Cu Chulainn]

That's the old God, back when not knowing he existed may well hav meant you didn't go to heaven. Post-Christ, short of for the Apostles (whom he needed to spread the word without revealing himself beyond all doubt), he never actually proved that he was there (the Jews didn't believe that Jesus was his son, even when he performed his miracles, and he refused to prove it in front of everyone when the Devil tempted him to). Now that it doesn't matter what you believe, he keeps free will intact

But you've got it all wrong. Free will would be knowing for sure he exists and choosing to follow or not follow him. Giving us no evidence and then demanding that we take someone's word for it or we burn forever isn't free will. It's psychotic.

 

[Theige]

Link to video.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

But only He could do that, which would prove that He existed. See my last post.

How is proving a truth a violation of free will? And there are people who still won't accept something even with mountains of evidence behind it.

 

[Marl]

Duke Nukem Forever is coming, so...

 

[civ_king]

If miracles only happened to Christians, I would find that an interesting fact. By the OP's logic, if he were to read this page he should, if not convert to Hinduism, fusion some idea of a universal religion.

1) The Church spent 10 rigorous years vetting this,
2) you do realize that the miracle happened in a first world country right, the doctor who had performed 1500+ of these operations thought it would take many months and is considered the best in the country so is it reasonable to assume the the doctor understands these kinds of injuries well right?
3) I'm really struggling to find a source for the miracle you presented (as in I checked where the website got it from and can't trace it beyond the book)

 

[Bill3000]

If miracles only happened to Christians, I would find that an interesting fact. By the OP's logic, if he were to read this page he should, if not convert to Hinduism, fusion some idea of a universal religion.

No; even false prophets have the ability to make miracles, biblically speaking.

 

[say1988]

1) The Church spent 10 rigorous years vetting this,

a) I don't trust the Church, they have a vested interest in this. How about an independent verification?
b) Just because they can't find a perfectly logical explanation, that is no reason to doubt one exists.

2) you do realize that the miracle happened in a first world country right, the doctor who had performed 1500+ of these operations thought it would take many months and is considered the best in the country so is it reasonable to assume the the doctor understands these kinds of injuries well right?

Doesn't mean he doesn't make a mistake. Maybe he ran a test that had a false positive/negative. Maybe someone wrote a number down wrong. Maybe his diagnosis was based off of percentages (99 percent of the time, with the given information he could have been correct). Maybe he just had a bad day and made a mistake.

The fact is that even with modern technology and knowledge, much of medicine is still not cetain. Every individual reacts slightly differently and doctors rarely have all the information about what is going on, and there are simply things we do not know.
Doctors use probabilities and experience to make decisions based on the available facts, this isn't mathematics.

 

[Flying Pig]

But you've got it all wrong. Free will would be knowing for sure he exists and choosing to follow or not follow him. Giving us no evidence and then demanding that we take someone's word for it or we burn forever isn't free will. It's psychotic.

Nobody burns forever; Jesus died for your sins which include not believing in God. Therefore even the most evil Muslim/Hindu/Jewish/whatever people end up in heaven. As such God doesn't need to tell us for sure he exists, like he did before Jesus died, because if we don't know then it doesn't matter to us.

How is proving a truth a violation of free will? And there are people who still won't accept something even with mountains of evidence behind it.

That's true, but that sort of evidence would be so great that a vast number of people would 'know' that God existed and be certain of it. Therefore they would feel very pressured into living a christian life, which might be good in itself but not if they don't do it freely and willingly.

This is all 'assuming God exists' of course.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Therefore they would feel very pressured into living a christian life, which might be good in itself but not if they don't do it freely and willingly.

Just because they have evidence for God doesn't mean they'll live a Christian life. They'll still have to make a decision.