what would you consider a miracle?

Ive heard people refer to all kinds of miracles,such as when a new baby is born the happy parents gleam and call this a miracle!
wtf theres a baby born every minute somewhere in the world,so its hardly a miracle.
or when some family dies in an accident and one lucky kid
(who no doubt was smart enough to buckle up the seatbelt) survives they like to call that miracle also.
I would think miracle would be something supernatural unexplained such as if someone cut of their arm or head and god would reach down and magicaly fixed it perfect..
I dont think miracles like that are possible b/c god (if it existed)would be bound by the natural laws of physics like everone else.

so what would you consider a MIRACLE?
have you PERSONALY seen any?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

if all the clouds in the sky formed in to words and every body on earth could see them at the same time, that would be a miracle.
anything that defies the laws of physics, must be deemed miraculous.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

From what I have seen around here, the religious will consider pretty much anything as a miracle. Examples include Lori finding a box of testicle cream in her trashcan and Woody getting a job, (although the latter might indeed actually be a miracle).

However, personally I am not one to subscribe to all that "miracle" nonsense.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Miracles should be events that are clearly impossible by any natural means, and they should be delivered by obviously supernatural means. It is not enough that something Impossible should occur, but it should be accompanied by such Show of Divine Agency. it is not enough that a child should be miraculously healed, but one should also have some perception of a Divine Agency -- an Angel or a Saint whose appearance is also Miraculous.

But often people want to stretch the meaning of Miracle until it means almost nothing, just so they can say they experienced a "Miracle". The False Apostle Paul, the favorite of Protestants, began this tradition. He started by downgrading the Holy Spirit from the Agent of Divine Miracles in the Saints, to being the simple seven attributes that any person of normal development would possess. According to Paul's description of the Holy Spirit, "looking both ways before crossing the street" would be an indication that one is possessed of the Holy Spirit. Also, Paul said it was a 'Miracle' when he screamed at a little old man in Crete so that the poor old man had a heart attack. It was also a miracle for Paul when a young spry lad fell from a 3rd Story Window (what is that? 12 feet...less then 4 meters) and paul was one of the crowd standing around when the boy caught back his breath and got up. Those are the documented Miracles of Paul.

That is quite a let down from what Jesus had done -- turning water to wine, feeding 5000 from a single paper lunch sack, healing the blind and the leperous -- dozens of instances at a time. Or even the later Medieval Miracles of the Marian Saints -- again healing crowds from Hospitals, levitation and flying, bringing the dead to life, even at the trivial level of bringing animals back to Life (Saint Francis of Paola Italy -- not Saint Francis of Assis -- once brought a platter of cooked trout back to life infront of the King of France and his dinner party -- Francis was a strict vegetarian. Also, when Construction Laborers had accidentally selected Francis's Pet Lamb for lunch and then thrown its skin and bones into a brick furnace... a burning furnace, Francis, in front of them all, opened the door of the furnace, and while scolding the lamb for risking being burned alive if it stayed in the furnace any longer reached into the flames and pulled out his Pet Lamb, alive and whole and without burning himself. Oh, and then once a Vatican Rep came down to Southern Italy to investigate Francis's Miracles and asked Francis what his definition of Miracle was. Francis cryptically answered by walking over to a cherry red hot coal stove and picked it up in his hands, and asked the Vatican Rep "Why do you think I can do these things?" When the Rep stuttered, "No, I do not". Francis said "Because I can". It was much like God answering "I am" when Moses asked the Spirit in the Burning Bush who it was. A Saint can perform miracles because he can).

so, no, a miracle needs to be a miracle. We have a word for those other things. They are "lucky breaks".

 

People don't consider everyday things miracles anymore because they have gotten used to them. But do you know exactly why and how a baby is born? Everyday things are as much miracle as anything else.

Generally miracles must include love, otherwise it's just trickery or magic.

I heard from a christian that he had seen bodyparts like eyes, arms and legs grow back after being cut off. He said it happened in a few seconds.

There could be a logical explanation to that. Maybe some artist could do that, or aliens. Nothing that happens in nature can defy the laws of nature. I don't think the laws of nature are perfectly strict. Maybe all laws can be bent/broken/controlled, even by humans.

 

then anomaly is miracle. Physics law states water freezes at 0 degrees celcius; formed as liquid at -4 is not explainable. It just accepted, and defined as anomaly.

 

wah? there is more to freezing something than temp. ever hear of supercooled water?

 

I'm not specifically talking about water; it's about anomaly; a definition set up to some occurence which not following regularity of physics law.

 

Split the moon in half and put it back together. Wait a minute, hasn't that miracle already been accomplished? Hello, sam?

 

Hello (Q),

Yes I've heard about this.

edit: it is mentioned in the Quran


The splitting of the moon is mentioned in the Holy Qur'an, Surah Al-Qamar (54), Verses 1-3:

The hour drew nigh and the moon was rent in twain.
And if they behold a portent they turn away and say:
Prolonged illusion.
They denied (the Truth) and followed their own lusts.
Yet everything will come to a decision.

You might be interested in this:

 

However, this is the opinion of Islamic scholars:

 

And, your opinion is... ?

 

I never venture an opinion on subjects where I do not have all the information (not anymore)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

But, didn't you claim to have made yourself educated of the religion you chose? Did you miss this one? If you find that the moon-splitting claim is outrageous, would it affect your decision about chosing Islam?

Or, would you be forced to have to believe in the claim since you believe in Islam?

 

I didn't miss it; but since I was not there, I cannot know what the people saw.

Better men than me have thrashed it out and agreed that it was an illusion created by God to help the Prophet. In the absence of any evidence either way, it seems reasonable to me.

There. You pinned me down.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

walking in a casino with one dollar and coming out with 50million dollars, that would be a miracle in my book! One hell of a lucky streak.

lol

 

Fair enough, in your opinion, splitting the moon in half and putting it back together in order to support Islam, is 'reasonable.'

I would have expected that a much more convincing miracle would have been for Allah to reveal himself, instead of 'channeling' through an angel to a single person (remember Joseph Smith?)

 

In Islam we believe that Allah is formless and hence any form he would take would be a derived one. Also the major article of Islam is the belief in God - because of the concept of free will, there must be the opportunity to decide for yourself. That said, there are people who will believe regardless, those who will believe only when convinced and those who will never believe.

 

Formless or not, if he has the power to create a universe, it should take little effort to create a convincing form for all to see. The splitting of the moon can take little more effort than crossing ones eyes.

"Many religious cults have been described by their critics as confidence tricks. It is alleged that their aim is to obtain money from their followers by deception. It can be unclear, however, whether they are doing it for con-artist reasons or for religious/welfare reasons. If the cult leader can be proven to use any form of deception or trickery to garner funds, then it is a con."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_trick

I suspect the splitting of moon claim could be considered a 'form of deception' purely from a 'reasonable' standpoint, don't ya think?