Religious Evidence and Miracles

[IronUnkind]

I defend it not against the literal truth of your post but against its innuendo.

[usmhot]

Of course, the point you are really missing is that BluffTHIS' original post is the sort of belief / sentiment that lead us down such wonderful paths as the crusades and the witch-hunts and still brings us world-wide terrorism, torture and murder in many of its most horrendous forms.
When people start to think that God affects their lives in subtle ways to help them avoid death or to introduce them to their spouse then eventually many of them compare the 'good' life God has assured them to the 'bad' life God visits on others and come to the conclusion that if God in his infinite wisdom punishes them then we should help him to do this.

[IronUnkind]

What a slippery slope you describe! You're frightening me into unbelief! The reason people are missing your point is because it's stupid.

[usmhot]

Ahh, a master of reasoned and intellectual debate, I see. In your long 13 years on this planet you obviously believe you have perfected the art of discussion and rebuttal. Pithy, incisive, creative and intelligent are clearly words that have no meaning for you.

[IronUnkind]

[ QUOTE ]
Pithy, incisive, creative and intelligent are clearly words that have no meaning for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

But I've proven my ability to use the word 'stupid' in its proper context.

[coheedandcambria]

Oh yeah? Well I found an "azure amulet of insane Christian creation" in a bejeweled strongbox and I can't get the thing to turn off!!! Help!!!

[andyfox]

"I most certainly believe that God has performed supernatural miracles, many of which are told of in the bible, and that He might from time to time continue to perform such miracles. . . skeptical non-believers will merely state that in the case of such a miracle that might be reported today, that even if science cannot explain it, it is certainly due to the fact that either enough information has not been gathered regarding such a reported occurance, that the reporters were not credible, or that science merely has not progressed to the point to be able to explain what must surely have a rational scientific explanation. I should also mention that I personally do not believe most such current reports myself for the same reasons . . ."

Why, then, do you believe the miracles reported in the bible, which was written by a person or persons with an agenda, in an age when science could explain much less than it can today, and when recording information was more haphazard than it is today in the electronic age?

[BluffTHIS!]

Instataneous cures of various maladies not involving the admistration of any medicines or therapies, changing water into wine, and bringing back someone from the dead days after being entombed would qualify today as miracles and be unable to be explained by today's science as well. And regarding such acts being written by people with an "agenda", everything written by anyone, including us posters, is written to advance some "agenda".

[John Cole]

It ain't necessarily so
It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so

[BZ_Zorro]

[ QUOTE ]
Instataneous cures of various maladies not involving the admistration of any medicines or therapies, changing water into wine, and bringing back someone from the dead days after being entombed would qualify today as miracles and be unable to be explained by today's science as well.

[/ QUOTE ]
These are indeed miracles. If there was any proof that they happened, I might rethink my belief system.

Here's a fact you probably didn't know: The first record of anything regarding Jesus was written at least 40 years after he died. THe bible wasn't written by eyewitnesses, it was written long after Jesus was dead. Nothing written about Jesus (biblical or not) was written by an eyewitness or even a contemporary. This is an undisputed fact by most historians, including Catholic apologists.

There is no independent (i.e. not contained in a religious book) proof that any of these miracles occurred. In fact, there is barely any independent proof that Jesus even existed. The Romans were excellent record keepers, but a Millenia of searching has failed to find any writings or records of Jesus, which many consider to be odd. The first appears 70 years after his death, by the Roman historian Tacitus. It is a one line reference and uses his name incorrectly. There is no mention of any purported miracles. This is not atheist propaganda, this is from historians and Catholic apologists who have a vested interest in proving his existence.

By the way, why don't you believe in Muhammed?