Replies

Faith, not a rational approach based on evidence, alternative explanations and the like, is at the basis of belief in miracles -- and most religious beliefs -- so the idea of "proof" of miracles is absurd on its face. Believers would be more honest simply to say this is faith, belief without proof, rather than wrapping it in an aura of reason.

After all, Catholics don't use scientific tests to prove that communion wafers become flesh and wine becomes blood when it enters the mouth, throat and stomach after a priest blesses it. It's faith.

Faith, not a rational approach based on evidence, alternative explanations and the like, is at the basis of belief in miracles......

I'm not sure what you mean by nebulous language like "belief in miracles".

A miracle by definition, is something which can not be explained by the laws of nature. It is something which has no known or rational explanation. These things occur, indisputably and have been amply documented. It's to what we attribute these miracles or unexplained events that is the subject of dispute, I believe.

For instance, taking the example which you raised about communion wafers. Some communion wafers have exuded blood and turned into tissue. This is one example. Using the dictionary definition of the word, this qualifies as a miracle as it is something which falls outside the laws of nature.

Now the difference between the unbeliever and the believer lies in how we explain this miracle. Maybe this is what you mean by "belief in miracles". It is certainly a miracle using the dictionary definition. The believer attributes this to an act of God which suspends the normal laws of nature which are subject to Him. The unbeliever disagrees and as he likewise has no rational explanation for this, attributes it to a fake, a hoax or some freak of nature as yet undiscovered.

The real irony here, of course, is that faith plays just as much a part in the unbeliever's conviction as it does in the believer's. The unbeliever can not explain the event by virtue of his false god, rationalism, yet his faith tells him there must be an explanation other than one involving Almighty God. He simply believes that we have yet to find that explanation.

Again, faith. Just faith in a different "god".