• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The Perils of religion [W:1129]

Re: The Perils of religion

But not all miracles are lies or physical impossibilities; they're miracles. I'm not going to waste time in pearl-casting here and am going to say only that there are rational reasons to have faith.

If something viewed as miraculous occurs, it doesn't mean it is a miracle. The religious simply try to interpret it that way as proof their imaginary god is real. But in fact anything like that which occurs is simply natural or it wouldn't occur.
 
Re: The Perils of religion


Perfect. I will just add this:

I do admit that dealing with the supernatural can be tricky and that I could be wrong, so I promise to repent as soon as God, pope, or any of the saints restores a missing arm to an amputee. Or am I asking for too much because God cannot be bothered with the simple cases like a missing limb, but, instead, prefers to show his miracle-making abilities by curing only the diseases that are neurological, bacterial or viral, which our immune system can normally handle all by itself anyway.

No, attaching a fully functional artificial arm is not a miracle. It's wonderful but not a miracle.

If it is, then, as Einstein said, everything is a miracle. Which simply means that nothing is.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

If something viewed as miraculous occurs, it doesn't mean it is a miracle. The religious simply try to interpret it that way as proof their imaginary god is real. But in fact anything like that which occurs is simply natural or it wouldn't occur.

Even doctors use the word "miracle."
 
Re: The Perils of religion

No, sometimes it's used in the literal sense.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

Even doctors use the word "miracle."

Yes.. but using vernacular to describe an unexpected but good result does not mean that they actually thing it is divine intervention. Doesn't mean they don't either. However, one thing they can't do is say "Yes, it is indeed divine intervention" and be truthful about knowing that.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

They're being truthful if they're stating their belief that what they have witnessed can only be described as a miracle that is beyond medical science. I don't like your trying to insinuate that someone is lying if he or she says, "Yes, it is indeed divine intervention."
 
Re: The Perils of religion


They can either use it like i said, in the vernacular.. which said 'We don't know what happened, but it's good', or if they were using the term in the religious sense, they could give their opinion that it was divine intervention, but they would have no objective evidence that was so.
 
Re: The Perils of religion


As I posted above, next time a guy has his missing arm restored without any medical or technological means let us know.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

I could tell you about the top of a femur that had been eaten away/hollowed out by a neoplasm which spontaneously regenerated itself.

But I won't.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

I could tell you about the top of a femur that had been eaten away/hollowed out by a neoplasm which spontaneously regenerated itself.

But I won't.

Sometimes things like that will happen, not that I believe you for a second, but it is still natural, not some imaginary deity intervening. Anyone who says it is is lyeing to both themselves and anyone listening.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

Miracles and aliens with green horns have one thing in common: they are seen only by the believers - typically low end people with their teeth missing. Miracles never happen at Fermi Lab, and aliens never land at O'Hare.

If I were God, I would do my best to show the non-believers that they are wrong. Showing miracles to the believers seems like a colossal waste of effort. Like trying to convince me not to vote for Hillary. I already got it.

Let's be practical. How much effort would it take to convert hardcore atheists to believers as compared to what it took to create the Universe? A walk in the park on a sunny day.

And, then, there is the question of misapplication of God's efforts: why bother staining a wall in an Italian village to make it appear like a crying Mary if, right behind that wall, there is a child dying of leukemia?

To me, that is beyond embarrassing.
 
Re: The Perils of religion


I like when someone says God helped them find their keys or something mundane like that while the kid next door dies of leukemia or an entire country full of kids starves for generations. Yeah...that god dude has a hell of a sense for priorities.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

This one takes the cake.

To canonize John Paul 2, Vatican was forced to find a witness to a miracle attributable to him. Actually, they needed two.

So they found a woman who claimed that she was miraculously healed by JP2 - after his death. I guess if the dead can vote in the US, some can do miracles.

Strangely, JP2, who could do that from his grave, failed to perform one on himself while he was still alive. Or at least ask God to do it for him.

I am sure that with his record of good deeds done for others, God wouldn't mind a little selfishness.

I apologize if anyone here feels I am spoofing a religion, but the whole subject is so ridiculous that it's hard to find a classy way to debate it.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

I don't think you understand anything about who John Paul II was or what he said about redemptive suffering.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

I like when someone says God helped them find their keys or something mundane like that while the kid next door dies of leukemia or an entire country full of kids starves for generations. Yeah...that god dude has a hell of a sense for priorities.
It must be remembered that the child had to live with Leukemia first before he died. Often sick and dying children say the most profound things, while an atheist may grow old get Alzheimers and die. Which one lived a fuller more productive life? Which ends up with the bigger reward in the end if there is a GOD, and which is cried over more if there is not? I think in either case it goes to the child.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

Dr. Bennetts and I are talking about life after death, about hope, and about children's amazingly similar visions only hours, or moments, before they die.

Listening to children foretell their own deaths, and then hearing them comfort the parents they will leave behind, has changed Dr. Bennetts' life. Never in her 15 years of treating children with cancer has she found a child's premonition to be wrong.

When Geni Bennetts tells me some of these children's stories, her eyes, and my own, cloud with tears.

Seven-year-old Danny had leukemia. He was hospitalized at CHOC and was not expected to survive. His friend, Timmy, had died not long before.

Late one afternoon, Danny's mother was at his bedside as her son slept. When he awoke, Danny found his mother in tears.

"Don't cry," Danny told his mother. "Do you see my angel? She's outside my window. She's telling me that she is going to take me to Timmy. She says that Timmy and I are going to go fishing."

Danny died later that night.

Some of the children that Dr. Bennetts tells me about have come from religious homes; others have not. All of them have been on medication, but their visions, reported matter-of-factly between more prosaic talk of everyday life, belie the suggestion that they spring from a drug-induced haze.

"We in medicine have seen people hallucinating," Dr. Bennetts says. "It isn't like that. These children are perfectly lucid."

The number of children who have had peaceful visions of their own death is impossible to know. Dr. Bennetts, however, is not the first to publicly talk about them.

Dr. Diane Komp, a specialist in oncology and a professor of pediatrics at Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, is writing a book about similar experiences with her young patients.

After publishing an article in Theology Today in October, 1988, which spawned further publicity, she says many parents wrote to tell her of their children's peaceful deaths after experiencing such visions--during their waking hours or in their dreams.

"I think the impartation of peace from these experiences is what has had the most impact on me," says Dr. Komp, who has been practicing medicine for almost 25 years.
 
Re: The Perils of religion


that sounds messed up on a couple of levels
 
Re: The Perils of religion


Religion spoofs itself so often you need not fear criticism. JP2 was yet another pope who enabled the pedo-priest problems to continue. A foul man at his best.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

I don't think you understand anything about who John Paul II was or what he said about redemptive suffering.

The Catholic church knows all about suffering having caused so much of it over the last 1400 or so years. They admire suffering so much they even sainted the bitch of Calcutta for causing all the pain and suffering she caused.
 
Re: The Perils of religion


:lamo Yah, right.
 
Re: The Perils of religion

The Catholic church knows all about suffering having caused so much of it over the last 1400 or so years. They admire suffering so much they even sainted the bitch of Calcutta for causing all the pain and suffering she caused.

Non-responsive. Non sequitur.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…