Why is it that so many in the atheist community cannot bring themselves to get past their anger whenever they engage in discussions? The language of many of their contributions in public debate is laced with invective and dripping with sarcasm and bile. There are exceptions of course, but they tend to fall more into the category of being the 'exception that proves the rule' when compared to the hostility of many of today's atheist posters. Comment offered by the theists in the public square is often depicted as being 'malicious' or 'venomous' and intended to enslave the 'feeble minded and weak' by those who post. Nothing could be further from the truth. Venom is something that is oriented to death. Christians are oriented in a 180 degree different direction. We speak not to the culture of death that grips our world but rather for the culture of life and light which ends with the gift of eternal life. For example, the Catholic Church in its hum...
What's with all the miracle stuff, relics and ascention into heaven in a beam of light and hosts of angels? It cheapens religion and turns it into something akin to a carnival sideshow. The lacey man dresses and incense are chi chi enough.
ReplyDeleteI'll let you in on a secret regarding all these miracles.
Deletehttp://i.imgur.com/gZSaQ.jpg
Its great you guys got the Virgin Toast figured out. You can rest easy in your disbelief and right off anything miraculous because you found a way for someone to burn an image on a piece of toast. I still haven't found an atheist that doesn't trip over his tongue when asked to explain the miracle that occurred at Fatima Portugal on October 13th, 1917, witnessed by an estimated 70,000 people. Even fellow atheists and reporters were there to witness the phenomena. They usually just say something like "mass hysteria, we just don't understand what happened but it wasn't God, or try and make 3 illiterate shepherd children out to be early David Copperfields. All pretty lame explanations to anyone with critical thinking skills and an open mind.
ReplyDelete“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun
Actually more of a miracle is that no one else on the planet outside of Fatima noticed that the sun was swooping over the sky. It's not 70,000 people who witnessed a miracle but perhaps 100's of millions in Europe at the time that had this movement of the sun block from their comphrehension. Also the fact that the solar system was not torn asunder by this incredible movement of the sun ranks right up there as an even greater miracle.
DeleteWell it was a miracle so don't expect it to follow your earthly logic. They have a tendency to defy the laws of the natural world ie. walking on water, raising the dead, deaf people hearing, blind people seeing. I'm sure had the whole world witnessed it, you'd still refuse to believe.
ReplyDeleteBut if you're going to proclaim a real miracle, don't say 70,000 people saw the sun swoop and dance around the sky, go big and say 200 million (let's say half the population of Europe at that time were outside) failed to see a swooping dancing sun.
DeleteAnd if the large number of people observing this "miracle" convinces you why do you nbot believe the Hindu milk miracle ( http://angels.about.com/od/FactFiction/f/Did-Statues-Of-Hindu-Gods-Miraculously-Consume-Milk-Offerings-To-Them.htm ). Tens of thousands of Hindus all over the world say statues drinking milk on specific days. How many people would it take to convince you of the veracity of this occurrence?
Why would you assume I don't believe the Hindu milk miracle? I may take issue with the source of the miracle but I don't rule out the possibility. I'm open to the possibility of a natural or a supernatural explanation.
ReplyDeletewell here's another one for you, he just died recently but performed miracles in front of thousands : Sathya Sai Baba (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathya_Sai_Baba).
DeleteThanks Rationalist but whats your point?
ReplyDeleteAnd just so you know, I don't believe every claim of a miracle but I'm open to the possibility. The works of the fellow you posted above could be easily mimicked by David Blaine or some other street magician so I'm skeptical in that case. Just to be clear, I acknowledge there have been frauds in Christianity as well claiming knowledge from the "holy spirit" from an earpiece and a wife in the back with a microphone reading attendance cards.
I don't rule out the miraculous in other faiths either. Christ didn't tell his apostles to test the spirits for nothing. Manifestations can come from a malevolent source.
If you don't believe every claim of a miracle how do you distinguish the true from the bogus? Do you give more credulity to those of your own religion? For example to you accept the Assumption of Mary but are skeptical of Mohamed ascending to heaven on the back of a white horse? Is it based upon the number of witnesses, their credibility, their reason for promoting a miracle? Or are you like Hume and accept a miracle only if rejecting the claim would lead to a situation of greater improbability?
Delete