[Mrs. Don-o]

Gengis, this may surprise you, but I agree with you to this extent: most purported "miracles" are not true miracles, but have a natural explanation.

This is why the Church insists on stringent investigation by medical experts who are not all Catholics (or even all theists) and who in practice reject most purported "miracles," only rarely certifying a cure as "medically inexplicable."

For instance, at the famous healing spring at Lourdes, France, there have been thousands of purported healing miracles since 1858, but only 68 of these thousands were investigated and found to be medically inexplicable. That would be somewhere around 1 - 2%.

Miracles are not meant to be a methodology of healing, in competition with the practice of medicine. (Thank God for doctors!) They're meant to be a sign. All these signs are worth --- in fact, demand ---- careful investigation.

I would go so far as to say a life lived in love and unselfish service is as great a miracle as raising the dead.

[Gengis Khan]

Medically there are several known cases of people who got cured of cancer after having reached very advanced metastasis stage or got off the wheelchair after being paralysed for ages. Its likely a lot of them (perhaps most of them) didnt consciously go through any divine healing. However its very likely many of them would apply the idea of divine intervention as an afterthought.

[Gengis Khan]

“I would go so far as to say a life lived in love and unselfish service is as great a miracle as raising the dead.”

Finally there is something we agree on.

BTW do you believe in “miracles”...(I mean the super natural kind)?