More on miracles

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Archaea

The physical world processes are miraculous to behold, and the First Cause behind is also a miracle.

Agreed.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

One man's scientific explanation is another's miracle. It is possible for both perceptions to be true.

Interesting. So what is your definition of a miracle? Is it purely dependent on its perception? Maybe a miracle is just an event that induces faith in God because it breaks natural law as it is commonly understood. Thus, a miracle in one time is not a miracle in another.

[woot]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

It would seem that you don't believe in miracles; however, just because you don't believe it, doesn't mean they don't happen. One man's scientific explanation is another's miracle. It is possible for both perceptions to be true.

But how can both perceptions be true? A lot of this will depend on your definition of "miracle" (see this Onion article for a funny example), but from the standpoint of a singular event that wouldn't have occurred without divine intervention, it seems that something is either a miracle or a natural process, not both.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Interesting. So what is your definition of a miracle? Is it purely dependent on its perception? Maybe a miracle is just an event that induces faith in God because it breaks natural law as it is commonly understood. Thus, a miracle in one time is not a miracle in another.

If one does not understand anything about meteorology, rain for crops would be a miracle; I'm no scientist, but I understand enough that when cold and warm air collide, we get rain.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by woot

But how can both perceptions be true? A lot of this will depend on your definition of "miracle" (see this Onion article for a funny example), but from the standpoint of a singular event that wouldn't have occurred without divine intervention, it seems that something is either a miracle or a natural process, not both.

See my response to ERCougar.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Interesting. So what is your definition of a miracle? Is it purely dependent on its perception? Maybe a miracle is just an event that induces faith in God because it breaks natural law as it is commonly understood. Thus, a miracle in one time is not a miracle in another.

My definition of a miracle is something that occurs for which I can't explain or even understand. And it can/does induce faith in God.

A rather simple definition, it is. But I think a lot of folks think of miracles as larger events occurring - a parting of the Red Sea kind of big. They don't have to be that big.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

My definition of a miracle is something that occurs for which I can't explain or even understand. And it can/does induce faith in God.

A rather simple definition, it is. But I think a lot of folks think of miracles as larger events occurring - a parting of the Red Sea kind of big. They don't have to be that big.

I'll have to think about that definition for a while. I kind of like it for the moment.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

I'll have to think about that definition for a while. I kind of like it for the moment.

It's always worked for me.

[woot]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

My definition of a miracle is something that occurs for which I can't explain or even understand. And it can/does induce faith in God.

A rather simple definition, it is. But I think a lot of folks think of miracles as larger events occurring - a parting of the Red Sea kind of big. They don't have to be that big.

So you accept that a miracle is anything that you personally don't understand, and that supernatural forces aren't necessarily at play? If so, I accept that there are lots of miracles, but it seems to do violence to the usefulness of the word. We already have words that mean something like "mystery."

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by woot

So you accept that a miracle is anything that you personally don't understand, and that supernatural forces aren't necessarily at play? If so, I accept that there are lots of miracles, but it seems to do violence to the usefulness of the word. We already have words that mean something like "mystery."

Yes, a miracle can be exactly that. As I said, I believe that miracles don't have to be big events, but small ones as well.

I don't think it destroys the usefulness of the word, as a miracle to me doesn't necessarily need to be a miracle to you. I believe miracles are more personal than mysterious.

I hope that makes sense.