The biggest alleged miracle in the New Testament, is that Jesus was born to a virgin mother, and was the Son of God, and that he was subsequently resurrected.

Many other cultures have similar stories. For some reason, christians label all the other stories as myths, but assign truth to theirs.

We all initially believe what we were taught by our family of origin. No surprise - these beliefs were the first ones we heard and were taught by family and friends. Add in the cultural factors of belonging to a group, and it is a no brainer.

Yes, some adults to change religions, but they are in the minority.

If ancient miracles occurred, wouldn't their be modern miracles?

Yes, absolutely I believe in Biblical and also modern miracles. Life itself is a huge miracle. The fact that we revolve around a gigantic ball of gas at a speed of about 18.5 miles a second without getting swallowed up into it, burnt to a crisp, obliterated. All while it perfectly tilts to get just the right temperature, atmosphere, seasons etc.. The fact that you can see, think, reproduce, pump blood through your heart, think, reason. Those are all miracles!

I believe all the biblical miracles back then too, because I believe Jesus was who he claimed to be. I have no doubt he did those miracles, based on I can experience similar ones today.

I have experienced miracles in my own life from sincere prayer.

Why hasn't there been a single Christian amputee who has ever had a limb restored?

Is there not a single Christian amputee who has not prayed with enough faith and belief for this to happen?

Is there not a single religious figure, pope, prophet, etc who has had enough faith to give a blessing to God for the amputee to have his limb restored?

PLEASE don't refer me to the miracles you have experienced. Just try and answer my question.

Why does anyone believe in the actuality of biblical miracles???

This is the question you asked. Leyla gave a great answer.



If you don't like the answer, then don't ask it.

Looks like you baited and switched to me....

Layla hasn't answered. Why don't you try?

actually she did - you just choose not to like her answer....

I don't care what her answer is, as long as it is responsive, which it wasn't. You haven't answered either. Let's be fair.

I guess her response doesn't show up on your computer screen then.

It does mine.

Hey Lelya, nothing you cited was a miracle. It can all be explained by science. The rotation of the Earth has been observed, not only on Earth but from space, blood pumping through our veins? Don't get me started.

There's a difference between things that seem miraculous to you personally based on your apparent inability to understand that they can be explained by science, and what is conventionally defined as a miracle- something that happens without a plausible explanation by science, or natural occurrences.

The term miracle is religious in nature, at least according to what I just read on Google. It has a 'divine origin'. There is nothing Divine about human anatomy or the rotation of the Earth. There's a lot that scientific about it, though.

midwestanon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey Lelya, nothing you cited was a miracle. It can
> all be explained by science.

They sure can. One of many great benefits of the scientific method is discovering the mind of God through his amazing creation. Few things have drawn me closer to the creator than the study of our world and the cosmos.

The world and the cosmos are incredibly amazing and beautiful things.

What is your explanation for who created the creator?

When I left Mormonism. I know longer knew what I believed about religion. What I did know was that there was a God who cared about me. I have seen too many miracles that could not be explained any other way. I know many others who have had similar type experiences. They are just not things you broadcast to the world.

Take a stab at my question.

Leslie:

Miracles are precisely the type of thing that gets broadcast to the world.

Do you live in a place where there is no tv, radio, internet, Facebook, etc?

You might keep your miracles quiet - but the rest of the planet doesn't.

"If ancient miracles occurred, wouldn't their be modern miracles?"

Jesus discovered performing miracles just wasn't as effective as he thought. So we have none today.

So there's Jesus--springing from a virgin, raising the dead,walking on water, restoring sight to the blind and healing cripples. And they still crucified him. Now who would kill someone who could do those things? Makes no sense at all.

You'd think someone who turned water into wine would be invited to every party on the planet, but instead they used him as an excuse to initiate their Easter festivities.

Makes you wonder if there really were miracles or just a way for the apostles to add some zing to their manuscripts before submitting them to the editor of the Bible's slush pile.

It's all in how individuals define miracle.

No. Never did...pure sci-fi.

Would could be more important to a person who has lost a limb than having it replaced?

How many thousands of veterans have prayed to God for this miracle?

Prayers = 100,000 Answers = 0

This is a very broad subject, vulnerable to fast (and often hostile) criticism, yet resistant to answers that are both succinct and sufficient. Allow me a few thoughts, recognizing that they will probably be unsatisfactory to many.

1) Faith in Christ calls for *faith,* which, by its nature, does not explain or prove every single thing. Skeptics and agnostics are wont to say, "prove it to me!" That kind of proof negates the very nature of faith, and what would be absolute proof?

1-A) As a former Christian Scientist who was brought up on the "proof" of "testimonies of metaphysical healings," I actually side with the skeptics on most miracle claims. (But I have had a few times when prayer/God worked in ways that were hard to explain in naturalistic terms. But only a few.)

2) One way to approach the disparity between Biblical miracles and present day is called "Dispensational Theology," which holds that God's work (His message, grace, presence, etc.) was "dispensed" in different ways at different times in Mankind's history. He worked in different ways in the OT, the NT, the Apostolic period, and today. Miracles served God's purpose of attracting attention to propohets, apostles, and Christ Himself.

2-A) The final dispensation began with the closing of the New Testament canon--the Bible, being complete, should be sufficient for Christian faith without the frequent use of supernatural display.

2-B) Not only am I very suspect about claims of modern miracles, I am even more suspicious of claims of "gifts of healing" or "systems" and "methods" of initiating them.

2-)C "Dispensationalism" is a very broad term, and there are many schools of thought within it. Some are simplistic; others are excruciatingly complex. And some have advocates whose Christianity I'm not sure about (e.g. mixing in New Age concepts).

3) Unfortunately, Dispensationalism accomodates LDS, which presents itself as the "final dispensation" ("Restoration") of Christianity. This is found commonly in cults (e.g. Christian Science) which like to lay claim to the completion/correction/recovery of "true Christianity.

4) We don't jettison our rational minds when we enter into faith. (A few on the board will take issue, I'm sure.) We want to think things through, but it involves primarily this thing called the "soul," which involves our personal experiences, our mind, our heart/feelings. As I pointed out on a post a while ago, when Christ raised Lazarus from the dead, you'd think his enemies would have been won over; instead, they conspired to kill Him. They had (like Pharoah in Exodus) "hardened hearts," given over to their sinful desires (lust for power, in this case).

4-A) Faith calls for openness and willingness, but not gullibility.

To recapitulate, I don't expect anybody to read my post and go looking for a Bible-believing church. But perhaps this cursory examination of miracles makes you less likely to think I'm brainless (stay out of this, Hie2Kolob!!) If the atheist holds that much is simply "not yet discovered or answered," I suggest that there is much that the Christian still has to learn in one's individual faith journey.

For those who want to seriously explore this, consider Lee Strobel's book, "The Case For Christ," (which explores the veracity of the Gospels, and more) or the more personal "Born Again" by Charles Colson, Nixon's henchman who found Christ in prison.

Yep, in that context it is stupid! Wish I had one of those miracles to heal my awful nerve damage. It would be nice, but it so ain't happening.

I was referring to the "aquarius use my definition" response.

I was reading an essay about the New Testament in which the author (who traveled extensively to trace, or attempt to trace the path of the twelve apostles,) talked about how it would be a mistake to try to place the NT into either the fiction or non-fiction camp. His opinion is that it is a blend of both because the distinction was not as important to religious people in days of yore as it would be to us.

So as to miracles, perhaps back then there were things that were marvelous and beyond reasonable explanation, just as there are now. And perhaps people came up with elaborate stories to try to explain those things, and that those stories had some measure of truth, and some things that were wished for.

An interesting approach, Summer, but I take exception. It strikes me as waffling: "I don't believe what the Bible says, but I do believe what it means, even if the Bible writers embellished the story." The simple fact is, it's impossible to separate Scripture from the supernatural.

Either Jesus was clinically dead (executed by very capable, professional, and vicious soldiers), and rose from the dead, or He didn't. As I've stated on a few posts (usually to DaveTheAtheist at Easter time), Paul is emphatic on this:

"And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain" (1 Cor. 15.14).

For those who wonder about things like Adam & Eve (Myth? Allegory? literal history? what?) and the missing day in the OT, axeheads that float, a Messiah who walks on water, I submit this for consideration: Saving faith is focused (or centered) on the Resurrection, and that alone. Paul wrote in Romans 10.9,10:

"If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved."

That's the gospel in a nutshell. But remember, mighty oaks grow from acorns.

What I find interesting is that there is a pretty good paper trail for Paul. And Paul, by his own documentation, spent two weeks visiting the apostle Peter (Simon Peter) in Jerusalem. During that time period, he also met James the Just (Jesus's brother.) What I would love to know, is, what was said during that time?

My personal belief is in a historical, non-divine (but enlightened in the Buddhist sense) Jesus.

Oh, but I did, young Padawan. You see, sometimes I answer the question that was asked. Sometimes I address part of the question only. Sometimes I answer the question that *should* have been asked. Sometimes I ignore the OP and answer another board member. And sometimes I go off on my own little tangent. lol

Can't you do a little better than that?

If you haven't already gathered, rjd, I'm not one to be hearded into line. Not in my private life, anyway. My employer has somewhat more success.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/22/2017 08:34PM by summer.

I would never try and herd you, cats, or anyone else.

But, the question is still the same. What is your best explanation for why not one single limb has ever regrown?

That would be a REAL miracle.

Hmmm. I thought the question was, "Why does anyone believe in the actuality of biblical miracles?"

On of the first cracks in my childhood wall of faith was wondering why Bible-style miracles don't happen anymore, especially with the real, genuine, authentic Priesthood Power back on Earth. "Why don't they happen now?" led to "Did they ever really happen?"

Can't just one person explain why a single limb has never been restored, no matter how many sincere prayers have been offered?

Please - just one person.

If they don't happen now, they probably didn't happen then.

Mighty jokes can grow out of your ass.

Hahahahahahaha!!!!:^)

"The biggest alleged miracle in the New Testament, is that Jesus was born to a virgin mother, and was the Son of God, and that he was subsequently resurrected."
__________________________________________________________

I don't believe in any of those biblical 'miracles' above as I have had 'miracles' in my life that have indicated 'none' of those occurred.

Can I prove my 'miracles'?----- definitely not as they were based on experiences that no one else witnessed. Additionally, some have been repeatable but not on my schedule.

I do believe in 'miracles' where it means 'science was not able to adequately explain it at the time'.

There are a number of 'miracles' on the web where it was mainly doctors gave up and said the patient would die shortly, then either prayers or whatever and miraculous recoveries ----- those are searchable on the web.

There are also many past life, vision, out of body, spirit communications, etc. on the web and in books but, not sufficient 'scientific proof' to prove they were valid.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/22/2017 09:31PM by spiritist.

It's the only explanation for the start of the Christian faith which has any evidence to support it.

You can list every single theory about the start and growth of the Christian faith, and you'll see the only one that actually has a shred of evidence is that Jesus actually rose from the dead.

You can dismiss the New Testament documents if you wish, but that does not make them disappear. And if some date to several decades after the events, that does not disprove them. You also have the simple testimony of history to contend with: There clearly was a faith birthed among a group of devout Jews in Jerusalem in the first century, and the earliest records of that faith claim it all started when their founder was murdered and rose from the dead.

Every alternate theory that attempts to explain the start and expansion of Christianity must draw on suppositions for which there is absolutely no evidence. And you cannot dismiss the resurrection simply because it collides with your worldview. If you decide a priori that there is no supernatural or miracles don't exist, try explaining the existence of matter and our universe without referencing an event that is singular in nature, never seen since, and completely outside our common understanding of the world. Welcome to an embrace of the supernatural.

Did I miss something? What is the evidence for the resurrection?

Explain the emergence of the Christian faith without it using only available documents and not ideological arguments.

Religions grow from the retelling of their faith based stories.

This doesn't mean that the stories are true or false.

After time goes on, there are no live witnesses to the event, assuming there ever were.

This is true for Mormonism or for Christianity.

You can choose to believe the retellers, or you can demand extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claims.

rebeljamesdean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Religions grow from the retelling of their faith
> based stories.
>

Sure, but the central theme of Christianity is the claim of the resurrection. This is the central part of what most scholars see as the core creed from the very beginning.

Apart from some a priori dismissal, is there a reason to ignore the claim if no alternate evidence or other explanation exists to impeach it?


> This doesn't mean that the stories are true or
> false.
>
> After time goes on, there are no live witnesses to
> the event, assuming there ever were.
>

And we still go back to a faith that verifiably started at the place and time its scriptures say it did. And there is no evidence of a time during its emergence they did not claim the resurrection as its foundation.



> This is true for Mormonism or for Christianity.
>

Mormonism of course shows itself to be false after examining its documents and history. You cannot say the same for Christianity.


> You can choose to believe the retellers, or you
> can demand extraordinary evidence for the
> extraordinary claims.

The demand for extraordinary evidence is fallacious. It's a bit of a bow to Hume's attempt to simply define miracles out of existence. I have yet to find an evolutionist who demands this for the amazing leaps that are assumed at many steps along the path of the evolutionary process. It's a device used to discount contrary positions.

No, claims simply require evidence. And the existence of the Christian faith that started in the place and time its scriptures describe is part of the evidence that builds toward the resurrection of its founder.

Of course there are gaps in evolutionary biology - there will be for a long time, and perhaps always.

The evolutionary process is indisputable.

The belief in the resurrection is the cardinal claim in Christianity.

This belief gives millions of people peace and hope.

The lack of proof of the resurrection, is no different than the lack of proof of any other biblical miracle.

You have to choose to believe.

rebeljamesdean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of course there are gaps in evolutionary biology -
> there will be for a long time, and perhaps
> always.
>
> The evolutionary process is indisputable.
>
I continue to be amazed at the labyrinth that is woven without a clue as to the origin of many of the central requirements for the process to work.

Evolution does not engage in origin of life discussions because that remains a complete unknown. Random fringe hints at certain elements are located on occasion, but never anything approaching an actual understanding of it.

Starting with living matter is a great help, but still evolution cannot account for the development of RNA and pretty much entirely agrees that DNA is too complex to emerge without significant precursors.

Add to this the near ubiquity of sexual reproduction among most complex life forms and the problem compounds. This is not a good use of energy and presents significant challenges in requiring parallel evolutionary tracks. Science often explains its benefits, but this does not explain its emergence and how it overcame the significant initial obstacles. Try reading some of the current beliefs on the emergence of sexual reproduction against the doctrines of random mutation and natural selection. It helps if you're a contortionist, and try to ignore all the outcome-based benefits that cannot naturally exist as part of, well, natural selection.

Certain elements of evolution are indisputable, but if you cannot account for the engine that drives the entire process, your theory is hanging on an unknown. Our simplest life forms require RNA or DNA to exist, but there has been little hope of understanding how RNA formed into a mechanism that gathers and stores information on the organism, and prompts duplication of it. We've had this discussion before. Claiming evolution is something unworthy of close scrutiny is like saying you have a complete understanding of automobiles except for that hot smelly thing under the hood.

You seem to dismiss the resurrection as implausible, but have you ever actually grappled with the missing elements required to complete the working of evolution?


> The belief in the resurrection is the cardinal
> claim in Christianity.
>
> This belief gives millions of people peace and
> hope.
>
> The lack of proof of the resurrection, is no
> different than the lack of proof of any other
> biblical miracle.
>

But there is proof if you're willing to engage it. The New Testament documents are spot-on in their description of first century Jerusalem, and the earliest creed of the church cites the resurrection as the basis for the entire faith. Most scholars agree Jesus lived, so how and when did he disappear?


> You have to choose to believe.

As do you.

Let me be clear. I can not and will not criticize any adherents of faith.

But there are simply no modern miracles happening today, like the ones described in the Bible.

You can all draw your own conclusions as to why.

You're surrounded by the supernatural. There is no natural explanation for why matter just exploded into existence, or why the universe is governed by immutable laws.

And if you Jesus actually rose from the dead, there's really no need for any more signs or wonders, is there?

You may be familiar with Matthew Chapter 12 and the rebuke Jesus gave his contemporaries who asked for signs:

Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from you.”

39He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. 40For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. 41The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now something greater than Jonah is here. 42The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom, and now something greater than Solomon is here.

I am not asking for a sign, but that would surely be a reasonable request.

What is unreasonable is a God expecting his children to blindly follow him and devote their lives to him with scant evidence.

If you can find a reasonable explanation for the initial start and growth of the Christian church that does not include the resurrection of Jesus and has some evidence to back it up, I'm all ears.

You've really lost me. Another explanation? What about the rise of IBM?

But I can't argue with this:

"If you decide a priori that there is no supernatural or miracles don't exist, try explaining the existence of matter and our universe without referencing an event that is singular in nature, never seen since, and completely outside our common understanding of the world. Welcome to an embrace of the supernatural."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/23/2017 12:00AM by thingsithink.

The growth of a religion is hardly evidence of its truthfulness.

I am not sure why you keep repeating that.

Scientists and others continue to study the origin of life, reproduction, the universe, etc.

So far, they only have some of the answers.

For now, we can choose a naturalistic explanation or a faith based one.

Maybe one day we will know.

RealJamesDean, please give my essay on Dispensationalism another read.

At the risk of sounding hostile or demeaning, RJD, you're thinking in terms of the Santa Claus god: "I want what I want, the way I want it!" The various explanations for pain and evil (Christian and other) are far too cumbersome for a discussion board, where banal solipsism ("God is preparing you;" "God is punishing you;" "This is your test" etc. etc.), although sometimes or partially true, are woefully insufficient. In LDS, you were spoonfed pablum instead of real theology.

What you want, RJD, is a kind of "I want God to prove and justify Himself to me on my terms." Responding to that is beyond the scope of my puny post.

Radio Bible Class (rbc.org) is a great site with lots of material from a Protestant point of view: daily meditations, books and pamphlets, etc. This page has a number of articles that focus on problems like job loss, injury, suicide, divorce/family break-up, etc. Worth poking around:

https://discoveryseries.org/category/when-life-hurts/

If you're game for something a bit more intellectual, consider C.S. Lewis' classic, "The Problem of Pain."

It's a miracle to me that people believe mythology. I can't imagine the thought process that gets you through the Lazarus myth like it could have happened. Four days of decomposition and he rises all bandaged up like a mummy from a Universal movie. I would have cast Boris Karloff to play Lazarus in a horror flick. He had the look.

Howdy, Rebel! The only miracle that matters to Christians is that Jesus rose from the dead. I'm a believer. But what matters more, is that I treat you and everyone else with great respect whether you believe, dis-believe, or have beliefs other than my own.

Here's to you wanker! Keep up the posts.

Right on boner.

Suppose somebody posted, "My leg was severed at the femur, and grew back!"

Would you believe him? Could there be a natural explanation? Was one of the Three Nephites wandering by? James, I grew up attending Christian Science "Testimony Meetings," where people got up and described how Mary Baker Eddy's metaphysical system supposedly healed them. Learning about the exaggeration, incorrect diagnoses of medical conditions, and occasional complete fabrication, I want to state that 1) I believe in miracles, 2) I believe they are extremely rare in the last 1900 years (see my little essay on Dispensational Theology, above), and 3) I remain extremely suspect of any claim of miraculous events.

With all respect, RJD, I wonder what your response would be if one was reported to you in good faith. Would you "move the goalposts," and say it wasn't miraculous enough? Or be vulnerable to specious testimony?

You can post and re-post, "Show me a miracle! Show me a miracle!" But I don't think that's the real issue. As I stated elsewhere, and speculating all too freely about you, I think you have a spiritual itch somewhere, and it's annoying you like Hell (no figure of speech). Faith is a relationship, and some people have problems with relationships. They want them, but some pernicious thing deep down keeps sabotaging their capacity to open up, partake of love with (S)omeone, and come to faith. I suspect your insistence on a miracle/supernatural evidence is like a shy suitor's reluctance to take a chance on asking the prom princess out: a kind of self-sabotage.

Please look over my posts with a fresh mind, and consider looking into one or two of the books I suggested.

Like you, and probably all of us here at RFM, I am trying to seek the truth, wherever that search takes me.

So far, that search has taken me through considerable pain, and some measure of peace.

Bible Jesus wants it both ways. He says don't seek signs, but he performs miracles before many.

He says have faith and your prayers will be answered, but where are the answers?

Where did he go?

No modern miracles - no modern Jesus.

And over 200 million people around the world believe they've seen a miracle.

http://www.slate.com/bigideas/are-miracles-possible/essays-and-opinions/craig-keener-opinion

"[S]urveys over the past few decades have placed belief in miracles in the United States at roughly 80 percent. Indeed, one wide survey of physicians gave a figure of 73 percent, with over half of U.S. doctors believing that they had witnessed one.

Moreover, for many, the belief in miracles goes beyond the merely hypothetical to how they understand some of their experiences. One 2006 Pew Forum Survey of Pentecostals and charismatics in ten countries suggests that some 200 million people from these groups claim to have witnessed divine healing. Even more surprising, 39 percent of Christians in these countries who did not identify as Pentecostal or charismatic claimed to have witnessed divine healing."

And over 200 million people around the world believe they've seen a miracle.
__________________________________________________

Thanks for the article! I have not seen any numbers relating to this! My gut feel was that a lot of people would believe they have witnessed a miracle and a lot more had one happen in their family or to close friends. In my family and close friends (6) have mentioned them: me, wife, mother, 2 uncles, and one close friend have claimed 'miracles' happened in their lives. I believe others in my family, also had them but mentally dismissed them and didn't talk about them.

Even though we don't agree on Jesus, I do agree with 'miracles' such as: healings, visions of the future, dreams of the future, after life, spirit communication, etc. Many of these miracles that I believe in are mentioned in the Bible.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/22/2017 11:39PM by spiritist.

People back then were superstitious, believed in black magic, thought that blood letting would heal, thought the world was flat, believed that killing a animal was pleasing to God, .... I am going to believe these people who thought they saw something miraculous......I DONT THINK SO.

It's not difficult to recognize where the Virgin Birth miracle might have come from.

I would have liked to use it myself in a particular instance when telling my parents I was pregnant! LOL!

Objectively, culture has everything to do with miracles. Do you think you could ask Jesus to send your brother's schizophrenia demon into a herd of pigs?

Religion offers people a chance to connect with power. The less connected with power you feel, the more likely you will adopt the religious viewpoint.

Objectively, I just ask the religious to get all in. If you feel in your heart that God can heal through, stop abusing the health care system and make room for others who don't share your faith.

If you believe Jesus is behind the wheel, or that God has a plan, then stop voting.

If we die when it's our time to go, don't bother to obey the speed limits or stop at red lights. You're good until it's your time.


I hope you can see that "people of faith" really don't believe it either.

Kathleen

I wholeheartedly wish I had enough 'faith' to pray for my left-side paralysis from a stroke to 'miraculously' return to normal. As for your question, I don't have a clue :)