Look, if someone wants to believe it's a miracle, that's fine with me. As long as it is not presented as fact.
Part of this is biblical fault, with all sorts of miraculous "accounts." For instance, Acts 5:14-16 suggest that +Peter's shadow was enough to heal people "afflicted by unclean spirits."
The whole concept of the disease in biblical terms is froth with such fluff. They all believed that sickness is caused by 'unclean spirits' and 'healing' was essentially exorcism. This applied to blind, "lepers" (which were not really true lepers as Hanson's disease was not known in Palestine in those days), the lame, the hysterical, etc.
The biggest stumbling block to miracles is that it suggests we can come to believe through them. From God's revelation, and in contrast to what the authors of various biblical books wrote, we understand that faith requires receptive minds and Holy Spirit. And as far as I know, the Holy Spirit did not descend on anyone and caused no one to believe until the Pentecost, so it is an enigma to me how could all those biblical people "come to believe" after seeing what we call "miracles."
Either the Holy Spirit was sent on the people before the Pentecost or the "rules" of belief have changed.
i wouldn’t necessarily rule out the influence of ‘spirits’ in illness.
i’m not real concerned what the ottomans had to say either really.
i think it’s possible. i also don’t think the white phosporus is necessarily a great refutation. i’ve heard a few ideas how white phosphorus could be involved.
honestly i think the lack of miracles today has AS MUCH to do with a crisis of faith as it does to do with fraud being exposed by science.
Thomas pretty well called the other apostles liars before he saw the ressurection too. I’m not about to call patriarchs liars because a few muslims with axes to grind, and a few athiests with some rudimentary science say its so.
I’ll take the church’s account until someone has a lot more than assertions something else is possible to go on.