Is there any way you can discern the real miracles from the fake or coincidental miracles, like the Vatican authority does, or do we resign to the laws of nature like the Jews believe? Also compare the Catholic miracles to the Hindu and Islamic miracles and is the Catholic Church the only claim to real miracles?
There are some very unique and rare Catholic miracles like:
The miracle of Fatima where 70,000 people of various faiths and beliefs witnessed the miracle of the sun on October 13th, exactly as predicted.
The miracle of lanciano where the eucharist has bled and preserved beyond scientific explanation for over a millenium.
Then again, there are some miracles claimed by the hindu saints, such as Raghavendra Swami who's miracles were like Jesus'. He raised people from the dead, changed meat into fruit, and appeared to people after he died.
http://www.gururaghavendra1.org/miracragh.htm
There are some muslm miracles also, like the lourdes-type miraculous Zam-Zam water
http://www.geocities.com/alislamiworld/miracles_of_zam_zam_water.htm
There is also some striking references of the Holy Qur'an to nature, which science can easily co-relate to. many also claim the name of Allah as appearing in nature very frequently.
The Jewish interpretation of miracles is that they ought to follow the laws of nature laid down at the beginning of the universe planned to the mind of JHWH.[/list][/list] Miracles are all in perception, some people will try to find something supernatural which means they will more likely see it as a miracle than someone who tries not to see anything as supernatural.
Heck for all we know these "miracles" were just well practiced magician acts :p
But let's say the scientific evidence suggests an unexplainable phenomena, like a miraculous cure or weeping statues etc... where experiments are highly supervised, regulated and contained by highly skilled professionals. Is this then an illusion of perception?
I would highly recommend checking into Edgar "Kacy" (I dont know how to spell the last name anymore, but he was a sort of "predicter")
Gives a whole new meaning to Miracles
| Lennon wrote: |
| But let's say the scientific evidence suggests an unexplainable phenomena, like a miraculous cure or weeping statues etc... where experiments are highly supervised, regulated and contained by highly skilled professionals. Is this then an illusion of perception? |
No, it is an unexplained phenomenon.
That's all you can know. The conclusion is inconclusive - end of story. You can't take something that has proven to be unexplainable... and then go and slap a random label on it and call it explained. Unexplainable means unexplainable. Not mystical.
Take the Pythia for example, the oracle of Delphi. For 3000 years, there was no firm explanation for the visions of the oracle, although there was a theory about hallucenogenic gases leaking into the temple via a fissure. But then a study was done, and the conclusion was that it could not be vapours because there were no fissures. It seemed like the mystery would never be solved, despite a thorough scientific examination. A miracle then?
Not quite. Another study was done only a couple years ago that showed the original study was in error. Further, they found ethylene gas was being vented, and realized that, given the temple design, the Pythia would be exposed to high concentrations of ethylene. And so a phenomenon that had defied explanation for thousands of years - that had even thwarted attempts at scientific analysis - turned out to be a crack full of gas.
Unfortunately, even if the scientific evidence seems to show that there is no scientific explanation, you can never conclude that there is not one. If you cannot find an explanation with science, the only thing that you can conclude is that you didn't find an explanation. You cannot conclude that no explanation exists. So you can never use science as evidence of a miracle. Just doesn't work.Miracles, well What is a miracle?
A think which you don't expect...happens!
A month back I had gone through a miracle. When my one month only website got Google Page Rank 4, I took that thing as a miracle because I never expected it but it happened.
So who will I give credits for it.... Jesus ? just because I am chrisitian.
What did Jesus do for my website? Did he triggered google bots to index all my pages as soon as I uploaded them or Did he enter the minds of people who linked to my website?
Nothing. Its just my proper planning and correct execution of the plan. But the result I expected is a page rank 1 but when I got page rank 4... I felt as if a miracle happened.
This is how everything happens what we call them a miracle. But the people who are religious mix these things with GOD and give a big boom for the thing happened.
Why the religious do this thing is just to make the people fear and belive in the GOD whatever they say.
If anyone tells you about a miracle... just ask him had he seen it. The answer will be no and he might have heard it from somebody else.
If any impossible thing happens in this world which has no proof is a miracle. And who did it will be the GOD.
If something we don't understand will be always called as GOD and any event which we can not belive and has no proof will be always called as miracle. 
| Lennon wrote: |
Is there any way you can discern the real miracles from the fake or coincidental miracles, like the Vatican authority does, or do we resign to the laws of nature like the Jews believe? Also compare the Catholic miracles to the Hindu and Islamic miracles and is the Catholic Church the only claim to real miracles?
|
It would be difficult to establish a justification for that since the Catholic church has no particular claim to the phenomena.
| Quote: |
There are some very unique and rare Catholic miracles like:
The miracle of Fatima where 70,000 people of various faiths and beliefs witnessed the miracle of the sun on October 13th, exactly as predicted.
|
I wrote an article on the Fatima 'miracle' some years ago for a local paper. The paper paid me for the article but then decided not to run it because of ''reader profile difficulties', which I took to mean that they didn't want to upset the Catholic readers of the paper.
The miracle is a very murky area to research and it was a real effort to work through all the source material and the witness statements. I spent a couple of weeks on it more or less full time. I can't remember what I did with the article - it is probably on a hard disk somewhere around here but II can't be bothered searching for it at the moment. The conclusions I reached were inconclusive but tending strongly to scepticism for many reasons. I'll not bore everyone with a forensic analysis of it here, but suffice it to say there are several major inconsistencies in the whole saga and there are at least 2 credible explanations for the 'dancing sun' which was observed by a supposed 70,000 (in fact I established a figure of more like 30,000 with an upper ceiling of 40,000 but that is not centrally important since it is still a lot of witnesses). The problems surround the prophecies themselves and the manner of their reporting and accuracy (or lack of).
| Quote: |
The miracle of lanciano where the eucharist has bled and preserved beyond scientific explanation for over a millenium. |
Yes, unfortunately I have a problem with most of these Eucharistic miracles. Incidentally the 'flesh' doesn't still 'bleed' and is not preserved beyond explanation. The flesh and blood specimens are kept in sealed containers and rarely see the light of day although I agree there is no doubt that they ARE flesh and blood. The problem with many of these miracles is a) they happened a long time ago and b) there was only one witness to the miracle. This also applies to the Bolsena-Orvieto miracle, the Santarem miracle and numerous others in the 'Eucharistic' class.
I remain very sceptical about miracles in general for a number of sound reasons (IMHO).
a) Frequency has reduced more or less in line with scientific advances. Miracles were very common in pre-scientific societies but have dwindled to almost nothing in the period post-Newton. This is surely not coincidence.
b) The lack of any unambiguous evidence for the phenomenon
c) The unreliability of reports when subjected to proper analysis suggests that many reports of miracles are in the same category as alien abduction stories - they are told by people who either have an agenda, a social need or a strong reason to experience that which they claim.
d) Most miracles involve direct contradictions of basic physical laws. Since the laws in question hold up every time they are tested then it would require firm evidence that they are being contravened by miracles before most scientists would take such claims seriously.
e) UFO, crop circle and other paranormal phenomena teach us that there is a basic 'background level' of miracle/paranormal experience. The focus does not seem to matter. This is partly due to a human need to believe, partly because any sample will contain extremes and society is no different and partly because humans are incredibly easy to fool - indeed they actually do it to themselves all the time - so anyone wishing to witness a miracle can be assured of plenty of help is so doing. It is also worth rehearsing an old argument of Carl Sagan - there are several million people in the US who hallucinate either intermittently or frequently. Most of us will experience hallucination at some time but many experience them much more frequently. When this is coupled to the fact that
| Quote: |
An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older — about one in four adults — suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year. |
(National Institute for Medical Health)
and also with the facts that 2 million Americans are schitzophrenic, 19 million are clinically depressed and 2 million suffer bi-polar disorder, then we are bound to get a reasonable number of strange stories occurring.
(I do not pick on the US for any reason other than the statistics are easily available - I'm not suggesting Americans are more prone to mental illness).
In short I find no compelling reason to accept the many stories of miracles just as I find no compelling reason to accept similarly incredible stories of UFO, abductions, crop circles, and other paranormal phenomena. I can certainly be convinced by good evidence and my mind is open to the possibility, but I should say that it is only slightly ajar rather than wide open.
Regards
ChrisI look at miracles different. A miracle was the first time a I held my children, finding someone who I love and loves me back that I don't mind spending the rest of my life with, watching my children grow up, making a new friend. Things like that are miracles to me. I realize they can be easily explained, but that doesn't deminish the value of them any.
Miracles don't have to be supernatural, they can be an everyday occurance if you will allow them to be.
But this is only my point of view.
| livilou wrote: |
I look at miracles different. A miracle was the first time a I held my children, finding someone who I love and loves me back that I don't mind spending the rest of my life with, watching my children grow up, making a new friend. Things like that are miracles to me. I realize they can be easily explained, but that doesn't deminish the value of them any.
Miracles don't have to be supernatural, they can be an everyday occurance if you will allow them to be.
But this is only my point of view. |
And one which I share wholeheartedly.
When I first understood evolution (and I mean properly understood as in had a 'feel' for the theory, not just a memory for it) it was miraculous. Take a simple system of sexual selection, introduce a random element, stir and leave for a few millenia. Result.....phenomenal.
Likewise with other science and math....it can be staggeringly wonderful to 'click' into understanding something that previously was just a page of figures or a paragraph of inpenetrable text. The world is a fantastic and marvellous place, and regardless of beliefs/ faith, it can still take my breathe away sometimes and I hope it will always be able to do so until I shuffle off.
Chris.
