Is this a miracle?

MobBoss said:
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/03/D8IKQCEO0.html
How exactly do nerves regrow? I didn think they could. So, would this unexplainable medical phenomena qualify as a "miracle"?

If you mean miracle as some kind of supernatural interference, then not. Also, the fact we can't explain something doesn't mean it is unexplainable - we may simply lack knowledge advanced enough to do so.
 
It's still pretty damn fantastic. You can get there are now neurologists hoping to get access to this fellow's brain when he passes on. And I bet there will be a storm of MRIs done for research purposes.

If we can find drugs/therapies to encourage growth in brain nerves, the world will become a better place.
 
No, it's very interesting for science, but there's no need supernatural intervention here, so no it isn't a miracle.

Why do you want it to be a miracle anyway MobBosss? As I've explained before, while miracles would be evidence of a God, they would also be evidence of a God of either such flawed morality or feeble power that no-one in their right mind would worship them.
 
If the guy suddenly got up looking like Ethel Merman and started belting out 'Thats Entertainment', now that would be a miracle.
 
MobBoss said:
Again, I made no claim. Just asked a simple question. You say it isnt a miracle. Based on what? The absence of extraordinary proof? I would say the extraordinary proof is nerve regrowth in the brain where it has never been seen before.

I say it isn't a miracle due to the lack of proof that the supernatural was involved.

Miracle to me implies supernatural intervention - what's your definition?

MobBoss said:
I think it obvious that the extraordinary did occur in this instance....if this were not extraordinary it wouldnt be a hot news story.

An extraordinary event and extraordinary proof for supernatural intervention are two entirely different things.

MobBoss said:
I would say the burden of proof lies with anyone making any claim. I.e. you claimed it wasnt a miracle....based on what proof?

I'm not in the business of proving negatives; it's impossible.

I am simply saying that it's very unlikely that it was a miracle based on the lack of extraordinary proof showing that it is.

Much like when I drop my pen and it falls to the ground the claim that an invisible monkey pulled it to the ground would require extraordinary proof - without this proof I am going to assume that this extraordinary claim is false and/or very unlikely.
 
carlosMM said:
NO, *I* am God, now you prove ME wrong :lol:

Well thats easy. I know you are not God CarlosMM. For a variety of reasons.:lol:

MobBoss: the simple fact is that making claims about unTESTABLE things is unSCIENTIFIC, thus the scientific tool 'proof' cannot be used.

Once more...did I make a claim this was a miracle? No. I asked a simple question.
 
MrCynical said:
Why do you want it to be a miracle anyway MobBosss?

Once more, where did I say this? I dont "want" this to be a miracle, but wanted to get folks opinions on it.

As I've explained before, while miracles would be evidence of a God, they would also be evidence of a God of either such flawed morality or feeble power that no-one in their right mind would worship them.

Once more the nuance that christians are somehow not in their right mind. Exactly why I wouldnt vote for an atheist.:rolleyes:
 
MobBoss said:
Well thats easy. I know you are not God CarlosMM. For a variety of reasons.:lol:
[god]Oh clueless one, you will rot in hell for this! [/god]

Seriously, HOW DO YOU KNOW?????? Come on, bring proof I am not (a) god!

Once more...did I make a claim this was a miracle? No. I asked a simple question.
MobBoss said:
I would say the burden of proof lies with anyone making any claim.
as you very well know, I was refering to your statement above. So leave me alone with the 'Did I claim this was a miracle' strawman. What I quote above shows you demand proof of inexistence, too ('any claim'), and I replied to that.
 
carlosMM said:
[god]Oh clueless one, you will rot in hell for this! [/god]

Seriously, HOW DO YOU KNOW?????? Come on, bring proof I am not (a) god!

Because you have repeatedly and adamantly said you are an atheist through and through. Thus you dont belive there are gods....so either you are not a God, or just a simple liar.

Gotcha.
 
MobBoss said:
Because you have repeatedly and adamantly said you are an atheist through and through. Thus you dont belive there are gods....so either you are not a God, or just a simple liar.

Gotcha.
Hm, quite faulty logic, I must say: you assume (and fail to bring proof) that God tells the truth :p

Also, in WHAT God should god believe??????


:lol:
 
Thinking about it, if someone told me God was an active member on CFC, CarlosMM would be high on my suspect list...
 
carlosMM said:
Hm, quite faulty logic, I must say: you assume (and fail to bring proof) that God tells the truth :p

Also, in WHAT God should god believe??????


:lol:

Atheism is the belief that there are no god(s). Not the absence of belief in a god or absence of belief in another god than yourself.

Bottom line, if you were a god you could not be atheist.

Plus, you have argued so long as an atheist, I dont think you have been lieing about it, so your not a liar.

Thus: You are not a god.
 
Truronian said:
Thinking about it, if someone told me God was an active member on CFC, CarlosMM would be high on my suspect list...

:eek: :crazyeye: :lol: thank you for giving me a new signature :goodjob:
 
MobBoss said:
Atheism is the belief that there are no god(s).
False, rest of argumentation based on false premise, thus also false.

lease try again next semester!
 
Once more the nuance that christians are somehow not in their right mind. Exactly why I wouldnt vote for an atheist.

Where have I said anything about Christianity? I have merely pointed out that a God of dubious morality is should not be worshipped. I have said nowhere that the God in question is the Christian God. As a matter of fact I have observed no miracles, or reliable documentation of miracles from any God of any religion. This pleases me for the simple reason that I regard miracles of this type as immoral.

You also make the (somewhat erroneous) assumption I'm an atheist, and try to use the above false interpretation of my words to justify your own dislike of them.
 
MobBoss said:
Not false. Actually the textbook definition. You dont like it? /shrug.


:lol:

you'll have to show me that textbook! I bet is was written by a member of a Near-Eastern myserty cult sect (e.g. Judao-Christian).

a 'belief that there is not a God' :lol:
 
MrCynical said:
Where have I said anything about Christianity? I have merely pointed out that a God of dubious morality is should not be worshipped. I have said nowhere that the God in question is the Christian God. As a matter of fact I have observed no miracles, or reliable documentation of miracles from any God of any religion. This pleases me for the simple reason that I regard miracles of this type as immoral.

Then by all means, strike christianity and just say "religionists". Same difference to an atheist as yourself.

You also make the (somewhat erroneous) assumption I'm an atheist, and try to use the above false interpretation of my words to justify your intolerance of them.

Wrong. I didnt assume anything. You said you were an atheist in this poll: http://forums.civfanatics.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=13693 Were you lieing? So you say here you are not an athiest? But do elsewhere? Which is it?

Yeah, I think someones assuming, but it sure isnt me. You perhaps?
 
carlosMM said:
:lol:

you'll have to show me that textbook! I bet is was written by a member of a Near-Eastern myserty cult sect (e.g. Judao-Christian).

a 'belief that there is not a God' :lol:

So you dont classify atheism as a belief? What would you classify it as?

As for the book, I will go with the Websters right here on my desk:

Atheism (from the Greek aetheos, godless/without and theos, god): 1. The belief that there is no God or denial that God exists. 2. Godlessness.

Sounds about right to me.
 
Back
Top Bottom