Six Poor Reasons for Rejecting the Miraculous

Saints and Sceptics blog ^

[TBP]

That is your belief. But others believe differently.

[TBP]

The author makes miracles into non-miracles.

No, not at all. It's a matter of opening to the miraculous and seeing it in every aspect of life.

[TBP]

1) Experience shows that miracles do not occur

Quite the contrary — experience shows that miracles occur all around us.

2) Science shows that miracles are impossible!

Science shows nothing of the kind. In fact, quantum nonlocality is quite miraculous itself.

3) If we believe in one supernatural event we might as well believe in Santa and flying reindeer!

Well, not necessarily. See #1. We experience miracle healings or miracles in our relationships or our finances, or the everyday miracle of life, and we can se the evidence of these miracles clearly. That doesn’t mean we believe in what we know to be untrue. (We’re not “progressives”, after all.)

4) But surely miracles are so improbable, so extraordinary, that no amount of evidence could justify believing a miracle had occurred?

Improbable, perhaps. Extraordinary, maybe. Yet we have seen miracles and we know them to be true. Life itself is a miracle. Had so many factors (Planck’s Constant, for one) varied by infinitessimal amounts, life (at least as we know it) would not be possible. Yet we are here, having this discussion. Maybe miracles are not so extraordinary.

5) You can’t believe in miracles unless you already believe in God.

Believing in God helps — but it is not necessary. Just look around you.

6) There is no way to tell from the historical record if a miracle has occurred.

Is the testimony of those reporting the miracle not considered evidence?

[LearsFool]

Apparently we need to back up and define “miracle”, because you’re using it in a different sense than it’s used in the Bible and the original article above.

For instance, you ask how one is able to post on this internet forum. Then you say you realize there’s a technical explanation, but don’t know of the underlying explanation. You use the phrase “this amazing set of occurrences” to describe what a miracle is.

If we accepted that definition, yes, there would be miracles all around us. Anything we don’t understand would be a miracle - even when we realize it’s understandable. (A logical conclusion, then, would be: The less we understand, the more miracles we’ll see. Like not wanting to know how the magician does the trick which amazes us.)

Like you, I am amazed at many occurrences around me. The deadness of winter gives way to the renewal of life every spring. The grass grows green, the trees sprout leaves and blossom, the birds sing, the rabbits frolic. It’s all done at God’s command, and it is amazing. Unlike the dumb hog that never looks up to acknowledge the oak tree that drops the acorns it eats, the wise man acknowledges the Source of these amazing things.

But “amazing” is not God’s definition of “miracle”, but man’s...man who does not wish to accept God’s purpose for the miracles He has wrought. Accepting God’s purpose for those miracles puts us under obligation to heed what He through His spokesmen commands of us.

Submitting to God is often difficult for those who are puffed up with pride and self-esteem. Much easier to just be amazed at the tasty and “miraculous” acorns, and consider oneself “religious” and “spiritual” for doing so.

[TBP]

Life itself is a miracle. You seem unable to see the miraculous in everyday life, and you presume to know “God’s definition”.

Amazing how “God’s” view of things always seems to be an exact reflection of the person positing “God’s” view. Voltaire was right — “God created man in His image and likeness, and man promptly returned the favor.”

To presume to state “God’s definition” seems to me puffed up with pride and self-esteem.

And of course, we all recognize the Source. But that Source is universal, Infinite, and without limit of boundary. EVERYTHING is of that Source. It is All in all.

It seems to me that your God is too small. And you presume that only what you believe God can use for a particular, specific purpose can be defined as a miracle. That is too narrow a definition.

Oscar Hammerstein was right:

A hundred million miracles are happening every day
And those who say they don’t agree
Are those who do not hear or see.

[LearsFool]

There's one thing that can be said for the definition of "miracle" that I accept: It fits with the one God has given us in the Scriptures.

(And no, I didn't make up God's definition. I found it.)

Unfortunately the same cannot be said for Hammerstein's and Einstein's. Whose definition will YOU accept? That of men, or of the One who MADE those men?

Let me pose a question: To what is the author referring in the bolded section of following passage:

"...how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?" - Hebrews 2:3-4

If "a hundred million miracles are happening every day," then how exactly did God use them to bear witness to what was said by His Son and those who heard Him? Were some of those "hundred million miracles every day" God's testimony, and the rest not? How could those who saw these miracles tell which ones were God bearing witness and which ones were just ordinary everyday miracles?

See, the absurdity becomes obvious with a cursory comparison between Hammerstein and the Bible. If there were "a hundred million miracles happening every day," nobody would've paid the slightest bit of attention to Jesus or His apostles - and with good reason!

So you see, if a miracle signifies nothing more than that God exists, has amazing power, is running things, etc., then He COULDN'T have done with them what the Bible plainly says He did, and the Bible is therefore wrong. If a miracle is nothing special and exceptional, if "a hundred million of them happen every day," then it is unable to be a method of God bearing witness, and Hebrews, the Gospels, Acts, and many other books of the Bible are full of lies.

Hammerstein and Einstein are at odds with the Bible. And you've got a choice to make, my FRiend.

[TBP]

You presume that the definition written there is "God's definition" because it fits your worldview. You presume to tell us that your definition is ipso facto God's definition. I don't accept that.

Many miracles we simply take for granted. Is life not a miracle? What about speech? Hearing? Love? Of course they are.

The miracles that Jesus did were, if nothing else, noticeable. They were perceived as "big", as (dare I say it?) showy. (That is not to diminish them in any way.) They were the kind of things that draw attention.

Now, how much of what is reported actually occurred is unproven and pretty much unprovable. But that is another issue.

"The things that I have done, ye also shall do; and greater than these shall ye do." If we take Jesus at his word here, then given that he worked miracles, our actions are also expected to be miraculous.

Why does God need to perform miracles and do so particularly through one individual, in order to be known? Many of us know God from quiet, direct, simple "just knowing", the kind of thing that one can see, feel, hear, and so forth, in quiet time.

[TBP]

Yes, it comes down to faith. Do you have faith in God? Or do you have the faith of God?

[TBP]

We are told that with "faith the size of a mustard seed", we can move mountains. Not Jesus, not Jesus and the Apostles, but you and me. So your theory that God simply had Jesus and Jesus alone do miracles just so we would believe in Jesus as some special incarnation just doesn't hold water.

[MHGinTN]

God does miracles. Angels use technology, and there are good angels and bad angels. Their technology is not confined to 4D spacetime so it appears miraculous.

[MHGinTN]

Is Catholic necromancy confined to 4D spacetime?

[MHGinTN]

So you claim to be a Christian and still don’t realize that a Christian has God’s spirit indwelling them, so God is not even an arms length from you ... if you are a Christian not a pretender doing all that you can do to earn what God offers by faith alone not your working tally.

[MHGinTN]

Go read the Book of Ruth, then you might understand Rev 5

[MHGinTN]

If the likelihood of something occurring is expressed as one in 10 is it a miracle if it happens?

[MHGinTN]

What if the likelihood is 1 in 10¹²⁰, does it approach miraculous in those odds?

[LearsFool]

You presume that the definition written there is "God's definition" because it fits your worldview. You presume to tell us that your definition is ipso facto God's definition. I don't accept that.

Please don't take my word for anything in this discussion. After all, I'm just a man. Instead, accept what is found in the Scriptures, nothing more and nothing less.

Let's look further at what the Scriptures tell us about miracles. In Acts 1:8, we find Jesus' promise to His apostles repeated and elaborated:

"But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth."

So we see they were assigned a task ("be witnesses to Me"), and were promised the equipping needed for that task. In the next chapter, we find the fulfillment of that promise, and the carrying out of the task.

"And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."

Was this a miracle, this speaking in other languages? The large crowd who witnessed it certainly thought so:

"And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language. Then they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, 'Look, are not all these who speak Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born? Parthians and Medes and Elamites, those dwelling in Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya adjoining Cyrene, visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs—we hear them speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God.' So they were all amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, 'Whatever could this mean?'"

They didn't see "a hundred million miracles every day" (unlike Hammerstein), but they knew one when they saw one. And Peter uses that fact when referring to the purpose of the miracles Jesus did while He was on the earth:

"Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know..."

Then he uses that fact in explaining why a similar thing is happening that day:

"This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear."

Later in the chapter we find a summary of the situation of the church:

"Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles."

Which explanation of miracles do you like better, Peter's or Hammerstein's?

[TBP]

Again, you consider what is in the Bible to be the final word. Many, dare I say most, do not. Just insisting that it is the final word doesn’t make it so and doesn’t convince anyone.

[LearsFool]

Well you’re absolutely correct on all points. After all, it’s not my testimony that needs careful examination, since it’s not my testimony that has any bearing on the subject.

As I said before, don’t take my word for anything regarding miracles. I’m merely a man.

[Alamo-Girl]

It is amusing to me that man often believes that if he cannot measure a thing then it must not be real. Truly though science cannot say that particles, fields and dimensions which have no indirect measurable effect do not exist.

I have no doubt that God has made creatures such as angels that are not bound by limitations applicable to mortal men. Miracles are, as you say, the domain of God the Creator.

Creation ex nihilo is a glaring miracle.

So as hosepipe used to say (paraphrased) I don't just believe in miracles, I rely on them.

[MHGinTN]

Dear one, if the odds are 1 in 10 of something happening, yet it happens and continues for billions of years, I rank it as miraculous. So I too rely daily on His miraculous works in which to dwell, and more importantly to remake me into something fashioned for eternity. God knows I couldn't possibly do it myself!