The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

A simple perspective on miracles

kallipolis

Know thyself
Joined
Aug 29, 2004
Posts
17,230
Reaction score
5
Points
0
Location
Piraeus, Greece
For the non believer a miracle is simply a misinterpretation of the facts.

For the believer the classic definition of a miracle was made by Thomas Aquinas who defined it as "something which is beyond the order of created nature" and, therefore, pertains only to divine actions (or supernatural phenomena) "since God alone is not a created being, he also is the only one who can work miracles by his own power."Thus according to the Thomist definition miracles are extraordinary events which are restricted to very specific circumstances. They do not require any interference with the "laws of nature"; for they are, as Thomas Aquinas says, beyond (praetor), not against (contra) created nature.

The order of creation is due to the will of God. A miracle is not contrary to the will of God, rather it is a special extraordinary exercise of the will of God. It is not the case that miracles result in an overturning or, negation of the laws of nature rather a temporary suspension of the natural processes as The Creator orders.

Perhaps the biggest objection against the possibility of miracles is founded upon the assumption that the universe is closed and that nothing out of the course of nature (understood as the sum of all material things) can happen. Hence the assumption that nothing can occur unless it is "preceded by antecedent phenomenal conditions sufficient again to reproduce it", as philosopher John Stuart Mill put it. Thus it could be said that every event must have a quantifiable cause and must, therefore be capable of repetition - should the same chain of cause-and-effect be put in place.

Mill's definition implies that there is nothing but the material world in existence. However such a definition takes no account of the human will, still less the will of God. A chemical experiment can always be reproduced, given the conditions in which it was produced once. But not everything in life is so predictable — and certainly not homo sapiens which exercises free will.

The will of God which brought all that is, or can be into existence may certainly interfere with the ordinary course of nature. But such events are not regular occurrences. Miracles represent an extraordinary inbreaking of the Divine that is not contrary to nature, rather beyond it. Hence miracles are neither random nor arbitrary.

Ultimately the question we are asking about miracles is another form of the so-called problem of evil — or, as it is sometimes posed as a question, "Why do bad things happen to good people?" In the case of miracle cures, the question might better be phrased: "Why do good things happen to some people and not to others?"

Sometimes good and extraordinary things do happen to good people which begs the question of those not so blessed. "Why me? Why did God not answer my prayers?"

Miracles provide us with many more questions, than answers particularly for those sick people who remain in need of healing despite their many petitions to God to be healed from their illness.

If we focus too much on the miraculous we may miss the central message of Christianity freighted by the death and resurrection of Christ — the call and vocation to the cruciform life.

The vocation of the Christian is to daily take up the cross and follow Jesus' example of self-giving and sacrifice, revealing the role of the servant — this is the true source of healing for both individuals and communities.

end
 
A simpler perspective on miracles : there aren't any .
 
Miracles are lies and some people believe it.

Water into wine? never happened
walk on water? nope
virgin birth? nope
raised from the dead ? nope
other miracles ? nope
 
If you say so.;)

well, when i do more research and think for myself, it is hard to believe in miracles.

It is very easy for people to believe in miracles if they don't think and just believe.
Maybe it is easier for them to just believe and get on with life because they have everything they need such as happy family, good job ... etc.
 
The perspective on miracles given in the OP starts with the presupposition that there exists a god, it is the judeo-christian god, and only god can be responsible for miracles. The entire rest of the argument is based upon this being assumed fact, yet provides nothing for reasons why this should even be considered fact. The entire argument is based upon a subjective prejudice that has yet to be objectively substantiated. There is no point in even addressing the post until the conclusions upon which the arguments are based have been demonstrated to be true and correct.
 
Many of us don't have good jobs, or no jobs, and many of us do not have happy families, or have everything we need, and yet we still believe just as much as if we had it all. BTW, when you are walking with Christ, and you see only 1 set of footprints......that means that Christ is carrying us through the Storms of Life.

Actually, historically speaking, belief and faith are always far far far higher in demographics with nothing left to lose.

Which is pretty logical when you think about it a bit.
 
For the non believer a miracle is simply a misinterpretation of the facts.

Hi Kallipolis,

You told us that you have followed classes at the OSU ( http://oregonstate.edu/ andhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_State_University ).

I assume that you will be one of the 200,000+ alumni of the OSU, and I was wondering if you are also listed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Oregon_State_University_alumni

Besides that, I was wondering which teacher on the OSU has learned you that the above definition of a 'fact', as used within the phrame of the above quote, is correct, and has anything to do with science, as teached on the OSU.

Thanks in advance for a reply.
 
One thing that both the believer and the none-believer have no choice but to acquiesce to with regards to miracles is that all we have to go on with regards to assessing their apparent occurence are the claims of those miracles: trawling through the endless reels of what believers provide as "evidence," wittled down, all poetry and hyperbole pared away, what we have are simply claims: I saw this, this happened to me, someone who knew someone who knew someone had this happen to them. When you start to actually follow the trails back to their advertised source, they tend to unravel, growing more frayed and frayed until the trail of claims simply stops.

For those who are not already determined in insisting on their reality, on the basis of ideological affiliation that has become parasitically essential to self definition, this is simply not good enough: it is very much equivalent to someone claiming: I have a friend of a neighbour who has a dragon in his back garden. He's even taken photographs, but I haven't seen them myself and I don't know where to get them. To the non-believer, those who insist on the reality of miracles tend to come off as pushy and impositional, since they tend to seem very desperate for you to bend over and take whatever they have to say and proclaim it glorious and wonderful without providing the merest shred of satisfactory confirmation. Claims are claims: they are not data, they are not evidence. And that goes for the claims in the stories from which notions of the miraqculous derive too: they are claims, not evidence or data, anymore than the stories of the Illiad or the Odyssey are evidence that those apparemt events occurred.
 
Miracles make some sense in terms of changes in perception that alter realities or in terms of grace or unexpected synchronicity that alters what might otherwise be the ordinary course of events.

They make no sense in terms of Biblical magical tricks like changing water to wine. If they did, it would take a few scientific verifications to confirm them and that would end the discussion. Surprise, surprise that never happens.
 
Hi Kallipolis,

You told us that you have followed classes at the OSU ( http://oregonstate.edu/ andhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_State_University ).

I assume that you will be one of the 200,000+ alumni of the OSU, and I was wondering if you are also listed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Oregon_State_University_alumni

Besides that, I was wondering which teacher on the OSU has learned you that the above definition of a 'fact', as used within the phrame of the above quote, is correct, and has anything to do with science, as teached on the OSU.

Thanks in advance for a reply.

I believe that you have confused me with another poster.

My university life was spent in London, and Bologna.
 
Recte: For the believer a miracle is actually a misinterpretation of the facts.

For the literalist, a fact is a fact and anything else is a misinterpretation.

There's more than a whiff of that in the air.

For the poet, miracles are more like rare bloomed Corpse Flowers.

What a penetrating aroma they release!
 
Logic is always a debatable passage in time.

Actually, much less so than subjective metaphysical beliefs and assertions.

One doesn't have to be a non-believer to doubt phenomena "beyond the order of created nature."

Miracles in that sense just seem implausible and irrelevant primitive notions. Just my opinion, of course.
 
Actually, much less so than subjective metaphysical beliefs and assertions.

One doesn't have to be a non-believer to doubt phenomena "beyond the order of created nature."

Miracles in that sense just seem implausible and irrelevant primitive notions. Just my opinion, of course.

The eye of the beholder, so to speak.
 
For the non believer a miracle is simply a misinterpretation of the facts.
Not necessarily.

I expect that many of the recorded 'miracles' supposedly performed throughout aeons of history, by one or other of the many Gods and Goddesses, were probably downright lies, falsehoods, and fabrications designed and perpetuated purely to increase the status of the particulary deity/religion in question.

The days of the full-on, in your face, bling, miracle - walking on walking, raising the dead, healing the blind, parting the sea, making a brazen serpents come to life , etc, etc - certainly seems to have ceased with the invention of camera and video technologies.
 
Not necessarily.

I expect that many of the recorded 'miracles' supposedly performed throughout aeons of history, by one or other of the many Gods and Goddesses, were probably downright lies, falsehoods, and fabrications designed and perpetuated purely to increase the status of the particulary deity/religion in question.

The days of the full-on, in your face, bling, miracle - walking on walking, raising the dead, healing the blind, parting the sea, making a brazen serpents come to life , etc, etc - certainly seems to have ceased with the invention of camera and video technologies.

There is a very real challenge for the closed mind of the dedicated disbeliever, in that many of the much more recent miracles are recorded, and testimonials are available for research purposes provided by those persons who have been healed as a result of a so called miraculous cure. (of God)

We need not refer back to the first century, rather reference those so called miracles that continue to occur in our own time.

We have our own version of Lourdes, here in Greece on the island of Tinos where the shrine dedicated to The Theotokos also evidences the testimonials of those persons who have been healed from their sicknesses.

This is a topic that requires the inquiring mind to take a neutral position, to enable the researcher to better understand the influence of faith on those persons seeking a cure that will deliver them from their illness.
 
There is a very real challenge for the closed mind of the dedicated disbeliever, in that many of the much more recent miracles are recorded, and testimonials are available for research purposes provided by those persons who have been healed as a result of a so called miraculous cure. (of God)

No, there are no miracles recorded - that would be everywhere if it ever happened, there are only assertions of miracles recorded. See the difference there?

This is a topic that requires the inquiring mind to take a neutral position, to enable the researcher to better understand the influence of faith on those persons seeking a cure that will deliver them from their illness.

:rotflmao: You just made me spit scotch all over my keyboard.

Your neutral position is noted.

An actual neutral position DOES NOT start with the assumption that a miracle has occurred no matter how many nuns are bleeding from their palms. PERIOD.

LOL.

A neutral position doesn't start anywhere near yours, or anyone who has a huge personal stake in the mythology they WILL NOT question, ever, for any reason - all of you biased as the day is long, closed minded just like crazy fundamentalists - unable to see beyond the end of their own religious noses - or is that GNOSIS - BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA, gnosis get it?

OK just had to get that out of my system.

PUH-LEEEZE. The only people who are completely unable to be neural about miracles are people like you who define themselves by religion.

All the rest of us require evidence when someone screams magic. I'm very sorry for you that you set the bar so low for yourself then claimed everyone else is being unreasonable, but then, that's kind of what the religious always do. WE don't need the open mind - YOU do. You will never consider anything that conflicts with your magic no matter how obvious, because your religion trumps your reason.

Such is life.
 
The eye of the beholder, so to speak.

Well, yes and no. The eye of the beholder is irrelevant as to whether a real bus is about to hit him or her. Unless he gets out of the way, it will hit him whether he believes in it or not. If you change the bus into a metaphysical notion arguably the eye of the beholder is also irrelevant, or at least questionable, because the bus has no objective or scientific reality. So one person's belief or disbelief doesn't change anything either. There is no objective or scientific reality to miracles.

That's not to say that miracles don't have reality in terms of alterations of perception that impact reality or the function of grace transforming bad things into good consequences or in some other way.

But, just because it's written in some ancient text, water never miraculously turns to wine. If it did and that could be verified, even on some very basic level, there would hardly be any need for any debate on the issue. Funny, how all these Biblical miracles only happened when the science didn't exist to test them.
 
Back
Top