What, exactly, is a “miracle�?

[Zzyzx]

.
What, exactly, is a “miracle�?

Many of these debates involve mention of “miracles�, and many decisions appear to be based upon “miracles�. So, it seems reasonable to ask exactly what constitutes a “miracle�.

[Zzyzx]

.

Ye are gods.

Fixating on a single issue, item or thought as THE “explanation� is a form of distortion that contradicts a search for “truth�. In this case a single line from a source is chosen for focus – ignoring the vast bulk of the same source that says directly the opposite (that “god� is separate from man).

“You just don’t understand� is a common refrain from those who have developed their own viewpoint that is rejected by others. Such views are often rejected for a good reason – they have no merit beyond the mind of the proposing individual and no application to anyone else (no matter how hard they are pressed or preached).

Typical of this condition is lack of support for the proposition (which, with extreme circularity, is “explained� by “you just don’t understand�).

I understand and agree with the definition. However, if you think about it, all people are divine according to that definition since all people have been created in the image of God/god with the nature of God/god and have the same nature as the God/god within them.

I HAVE “thought about it� – and conclude that “it� is nothing more than the personal opinion of a forum member who has NOT supported claims with anything more than restatement of her personal opinion – ad nausea.

Unsupported personal opinions are worthless to me – and are not considered as having value as evidence in debate.

Your example, which WAS funny, implicates "god" in the "miracle" (or potential miracle) of rescue.

Yes it does but it is a joke, a fictional story which sends a message that God works through very ordinary people

Perhaps the real joke is to propose that human lives are affected by supernatural forces of any kind -- including a supposed "unification or dification of us" .

and those who can't "see it" or dont understand it are fools because they are looking for a different God/god which is in their imagination and outside of people.

There is no assurance that the imagination being expressed here (ye are gods) is any less foolish than the “sky daddy� concept of “god�.

I perceive "divine intervention" working through those who rescue others from the flood or save the lives of others in various ways. I perceive divine intervention working through divine people every day as people intervene in the lives of those who can't help themselves.

That is an “interesting� personal perspective – that is presented with a total absence of support – masquerading as “truth�.

Note that opinion, conjecture and unverified clam does NOT equate to demonstration.

I have nothing else to offer anyone except the Truth and logic within me. All I have is myself to offer you. If that is unacceptable then I apologize for trying to share myself and my thoughts with you.

You DO realize that this is a DEBATE, site, do you not? “Sharing� yourself and your thoughts may be appropriate in settings OTHER than debate (perhaps Holy Huddle) where preaching is encouraged and support for what is presented is not considered important.

I am my own evidence. You are welcome to perceive me and the way I express myself any way you wish. I verify myself with my own words.

I have no interest in your unsupported claims and impressions of yourself. However, I do have interest in helping demonstrate to readers the defects in promoting such ideas under the banner of “truth� when they are nothing more than personal opinions that are not even vaguely supported by what can legitimately be called reasoning and by no evidence whatsoever.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 15:

Ye are gods.

Fixating on a single issue, item or thought as THE “explanation� is a form of distortion that contradicts a search for “truth�. In this case a single line from a source is chosen for focus – ignoring the vast bulk of the same source that says directly the opposite (that “god� is separate from man).

It is, however, a good indicator one may excel in the cherry picking industry.

“You just don’t understand� is a common refrain from those who have developed their own viewpoint that is rejected by others. Such views are often rejected for a good reason – they have no merit beyond the mind of the proposing individual and no application to anyone else (no matter how hard they are pressed or preached).

Typical of this condition is lack of support for the proposition (which, with extreme circularity, is “explained� by “you just don’t understand�).

'Specially when one is unable to present evidence to be understood.

I HAVE “thought about it� – and conclude that “it� is nothing more than the personal opinion of a forum member who has NOT supported claims with anything more than restatement of her personal opinion – ad nausea.

Unsupported personal opinions are worthless to me – and are not considered as having value as evidence in debate.

"Worthless" is such a strong word, may I suggest "useless".

Perhaps the real joke is to propose that human lives are affected by supernatural forces of any kind -- including a supposed "unification or dification of us" .

I notice often folks provide hypotheticals as if that constitutes evidence of some sort. Hypothetically I'm a handsome man.

and those who can't "see it" or dont understand it are fools because they are looking for a different God/god which is in their imagination and outside of people.

There is no assurance that the imagination being expressed here (ye are gods) is any less foolish than the “sky daddy� concept of “god�.

Would a "fool" be able to recognize and accurately diagnose the condition in others?

I perceive "divine intervention" working through those who rescue others from the flood or save the lives of others in various ways. I perceive divine intervention working through divine people every day as people intervene in the lives of those who can't help themselves.

That is an “interesting� personal perspective – that is presented with a total absence of support – masquerading as “truth�.

How heavy your quotaters hang.

I have nothing else to offer anyone except the Truth and logic within me. All I have is myself to offer you. If that is unacceptable then I apologize for trying to share myself and my thoughts with you.

You DO realize that this is a DEBATE, site, do you not?
...

It doesn't seem to matter to some.

I am my own evidence. You are welcome to perceive me and the way I express myself any way you wish. I verify myself with my own words.

I have no interest in your unsupported claims and impressions of yourself. However, I do have interest in helping demonstrate to readers the defects in promoting such ideas under the banner of “truth�...

Now Zzyzx, I love you to death and all, but you know it's spelled Truth.

...
when they are nothing more than personal opinions that are not even vaguely supported by what can legitimately be called reasoning and by no evidence whatsoever.

"You can't reason a person out of a position they didn't reason themselves into."
- Mark Twain

[Skyangel]

.

Ye are gods.

Fixating on a single issue, item or thought as THE “explanation� is a form of distortion that contradicts a search for “truth�. In this case a single line from a source is chosen for focus – ignoring the vast bulk of the same source that says directly the opposite (that “god� is separate from man).

Please provide proof that the bible says that God is separate from man.. You may do so on a separate thread since it has nothing to do with your OP.

.
“You just don’t understand� is a common refrain from those who have developed their own viewpoint that is rejected by others. Such views are often rejected for a good reason – they have no merit beyond the mind of the proposing individual and no application to anyone else (no matter how hard they are pressed or preached).

Typical of this condition is lack of support for the proposition (which, with extreme circularity, is “explained� by “you just don’t understand�).

Please provide evidence that the view of an individual has no merit beyond the individuals own mind.
Are you suggesting that all people who think differently to the crowds and don't conform to peer pressure think they are not understood by the masses? Can you prove that assumption?
Please do so on a new thread since it has nothing to do with the topic of "What is a miracle"

I understand and agree with the definition. However, if you think about it, all people are divine according to that definition since all people have been created in the image of God/god with the nature of God/god and have the same nature as the God/god within them.

.

I HAVE “thought about it� – and conclude that “it� is nothing more than the personal opinion of a forum member who has NOT supported claims with anything more than restatement of her personal opinion – ad nausea.

Unsupported personal opinions are worthless to me – and are not considered as having value as evidence in debate.

Thank you for your unsupported personal opinion which has nothing to do with the OP.

Perhaps the real joke is to propose that human lives are affected by supernatural forces of any kind -- including a supposed "unification or dification of us" .

Can you suport that presumption with any evidence?

There is no assurance that the imagination being expressed here (ye are gods) is any less foolish than the “sky daddy� concept of “god�.

Where is your evidence to support that one persons concept is any more or less foolish than anyone elses concept ?
Is the concept of a real person being "Santa Claus" more or less foolish that a persons concept of a magical "Santa Claus" who lives at the north pole?
Can you provide a logical reason for your answer?

That is an “interesting� personal perspective – that is presented with a total absence of support – masquerading as “truth�.

Thank you for your own interesting personal perspective which is also presented with a total absence of support. Readers are obviously free to perceive the written word any way they wish regardless of who wrote it.

Note that opinion, conjecture and unverified clam does NOT equate to demonstration.

Can you demonstrate that statement to be true?

You DO realize that this is a DEBATE, site, do you not? “Sharing� yourself and your thoughts may be appropriate in settings OTHER than debate (perhaps Holy Huddle) where preaching is encouraged and support for what is presented is not considered important. .

Yes I realize this is a debate site.
In my opinion, in order to debate successfully it is wise to understand how your opponent thinks and why they think the way they do. By sharing my thoughts with you I am giving you an advantage which you may chose to accept or reject as you wish.

I have no interest in your unsupported claims and impressions of yourself. However, I do have interest in helping demonstrate to readers the defects in promoting such ideas under the banner of “truth� when they are nothing more than personal opinions that are not even vaguely supported by what can legitimately be called reasoning and by no evidence whatsoever.

Are you able to demonstrate the defects in your own ideas and personal opinions? If so, please demonstrate that you can do it.
If you cannot do it with your own ideas and opinions, how do you propose to do it with anyone elses ideas and opinions?

Please demonstrate the defects in your own opinions on a new thread since it has nothing to do with the OP.

[Zzyzx]

.

Ye are gods.

Fixating on a single issue, item or thought as THE “explanation� is a form of distortion that contradicts a search for “truth�. In this case a single line from a source is chosen for focus – ignoring the vast bulk of the same source that says directly the opposite (that “god� is separate from man).

Please provide proof that the bible says that God is separate from man.. You may do so on a separate thread since it has nothing to do with your OP.

Why the sudden concern with the OP?

Perhaps one should be surprised that you, of all people (who steadfastly refuses to substantiate claims with anything more than personal opinions) asks another to substantiate claims. However, I recognize that as an apparent attempt to obfuscate in lieu of debate. Nevertheless, I will respond as though asked by a sincere person.

The simplest and most straightforward example is, “I am the lord, thy god, and you shall not have false gods before me� (or words to that effect in various versions). Notice that the supposed speaker does not say “you are thy god� – and that the supposed speaker sets itself apart from “you�.

It would be most difficult, in my opinion, to “reinterpret� this to imply an internal “god�. However, you are welcome to try to convince readers if you wish.

“You just don’t understand� is a common refrain from those who have developed their own viewpoint that is rejected by others. Such views are often rejected for a good reason – they have no merit beyond the mind of the proposing individual and no application to anyone else (no matter how hard they are pressed or preached).

Typical of this condition is lack of support for the proposition (which, with extreme circularity, is “explained� by “you just don’t understand�).

Please provide evidence that the view of an individual has no merit beyond the individuals own mind.

Notice that I included “lack of support� – indicating that an unsupported opinion has no application to others. Some may choose to accept views expressed without support – but that is a personal decision on their part and is not applied from without.

Are you suggesting that all people who think differently to the crowds and don't conform to peer pressure think they are not understood by the masses? Can you prove that assumption?

I make no such suggestion or assumption. Are you attempting to create a straw man?

Please do so on a new thread since it has nothing to do with the topic of "What is a miracle"

Why pursue lines of discussion that you regard as being off topic? Why suggest that I start a new thread rather than doing so yourself?

Thank you for your unsupported personal opinion which has nothing to do with the OP

Again, why the sudden concern with the OP? .

Perhaps the real joke is to propose that human lives are affected by supernatural forces of any kind -- including a supposed "unification or dification of us" .

Can you suport that presumption with any evidence?

There is no presumption on my part. Notice the word “perhaps� that begins my statement. That is known as a “qualifier� which denotes the statement is not offered as conclusive – but is suggested as an alternative.

There is no assurance that the imagination being expressed here (ye are gods) is any less foolish than the “sky daddy� concept of “god�.

Where is your evidence to support that one persons concept is any more or less foolish than anyone elses concept ?

I have made no such assertion – and make no claim to know “Truth�. Are you attempting to create a straw man?

Is the concept of a real person being "Santa Claus" more or less foolish that a persons concept of a magical "Santa Claus" who lives at the north pole?

I take no position regarding the degree of foolishness (or lack thereof) regarding Santa Claus.

Can you provide a logical reason for your answer?

Since I take no position, no reason is required.

That is an “interesting� personal perspective – that is presented with a total absence of support – masquerading as “truth�.

Thank you for your own interesting personal perspective which is also presented with a total absence of support.

My support is YOUR posts. Readers are encouraged to look for any support offered for statements in your posts (or any evidence of “Truth�).

Readers are obviously free to perceive the written word any way they wish regardless of who wrote it.

I agree. That may not be to your advantage.

Note that opinion, conjecture and unverified clam does NOT equate to demonstration.

Can you demonstrate that statement to be true?

Yes ma’am, I think I can – to those who understand that words come attached to definitions and are not used willy-nilly in reasoned discourse.

Opinion is defined as: “a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter or particular matters: belief stronger than impression and less strong than positive knowledge�

Conjecture is defined as: “inference from defective or presumptive evidence: an inference or conclusion drawn or deduced by surmise or guesswork�

Unverified is defined as: “lacking substantiation�

Claim is defined as: “to assert especially with conviction and in the face of possible contradiction or doubt: an assertion, statement, or implication (as of value, effectiveness, qualification, eligibility) often made or likely to be suspected of being made without adequate justification�

NOTICE that in none of the definitions is there even a suggestion of “demonstration�. Do you disagree?

Can you honestly say that you did not know that opinion, conjecture and unverified claims do not equate to demonstration?

If you cannot honestly say that (which would indicate more than a little naïveté), then your question demonstrates insincerity in debate through deliberate obfuscation.

In my opinion, in order to debate successfully it is wise to understand how your opponent thinks and why they think the way they do.

In my opinion, in order to debate effectively, it is wise to attempt to understand what an “opponent� SAYS (writes in this case).

I make NO attempt to understand how another person THINKS – and certainly not why they think as they do. I respond to what they say since I am neither a mind reader nor an omniscient.

By sharing my thoughts with you I am giving you an advantage which you may chose to accept or reject as you wish.

Any advantage that may accrue to me is certainly not derived from knowledge of your thoughts. Thanks anyway.

Are you able to demonstrate the defects in your own ideas and personal opinions? If so, please demonstrate that you can do it.

That is a personal matter that is, frankly, none of your business. However, if you can demonstrate a legitimate “need to know� via PM, I may provide some information.

If you cannot do it with your own ideas and opinions, how do you propose to do it with anyone elses ideas and opinions?

Notice that I allow / encourage others to demonstrate the flaws in their stated ideas and opinion (in debate) by asking questions that show readers the lack of supporting evidence and the dependence upon personal opinion. I feel no need to show anyone wrong – but simply allow them to do so themselves.

Please demonstrate the defects in your own opinions on a new thread since it has nothing to do with the OP.

When you wish to have new threads opened, it is your prerogative to do so – not request that of others.

It is incumbent upon you to not ask questions that divert threads for your own purposes.

[Skyangel]

.

The simplest and most straightforward example is, “I am the lord, thy god, and you shall not have false gods before me� (or words to that effect in various versions). Notice that the supposed speaker does not say “you are thy god� – and that the supposed speaker sets itself apart from “you�.

It would be most difficult, in my opinion, to “reinterpret� this to imply an internal “god�. However, you are welcome to try to convince readers if you wish.

Jesus Father was in Him and He was in the Father. When the Father is in you then you are communicating with the Father within you and the Father communicates with you on the inside, in your mind and heart. When you are ONE with the Father in the same way Jesus is one with the Father you are not separate from the Father at all any more than Jesus was separate from the Father. It's a miracle or a mystery which is understood by those who abide in Him.

“You just don’t understand� is a common refrain from those who have developed their own viewpoint that is rejected by others. Such views are often rejected for a good reason – they have no merit beyond the mind of the proposing individual and no application to anyone else (no matter how hard they are pressed or preached).

Typical of this condition is lack of support for the proposition (which, with extreme circularity, is “explained� by “you just don’t understand�).

Please provide evidence that the view of an individual has no merit beyond the individuals own mind.

Notice that I included “lack of support� – indicating that an unsupported opinion has no application to others. Some may choose to accept views expressed without support – but that is a personal decision on their part and is not applied from without.

It all depends on ones perception of "support" and whether the reader finds the offered support acceptable or not. It appears to me that in these debates logic is not acceptable unless it is supported by the masses who agree with it.

Are you suggesting that all people who think differently to the crowds and don't conform to peer pressure think they are not understood by the masses? Can you prove that assumption?

I make no such suggestion or assumption. Are you attempting to create a straw man?

Not at all. Your statement implies that an individuals ideas have no merit unless they are supported by the masses who agree with the statement.
It is very possible the masses really don’t understand.
Just because someones views are rejected, is no indication that their views have no merit except in the minds of those who think that way.
According to social psychologist Irving Janis, peer pressure can cause people to make faulty decisions. Therefore the group may very well be wrong and the individual who does not conform to peer pressure may be right no matter how much their ideas and concepts are rejected by the masses.
-------------------------------
"Groupthink, a term coined by social psychologist Irving Janis (1972), occurs when a group makes faulty decisions because group pressures lead to a deterioration of “mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment� (p. 9). Groups affected by groupthink ignore alternatives and tend to take irrational actions that dehumanize other groups. A group is especially vulnerable to groupthink when its members are similar in background, when the group is insulated from outside opinions, and when there are no clear rules for decision making."

References
Janis, Irving L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Janis, Irving L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Second Edition. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
--------------------

Please do so on a new thread since it has nothing to do with the topic of "What is a miracle"

Why pursue lines of discussion that you regard as being off topic? Why suggest that I start a new thread rather than doing so yourself?

Because you brought up the questions in the first place and I think it is polite to answer questions.

Thank you for your unsupported personal opinion which has nothing to do with the OP

Again, why the sudden concern with the OP? .

Because it is becoming very obvious to me that some people like to keep posting the rules as if I am not obeying them so I figured I better do my best to make it obvious that I am obeying the rules and also encouraging others to do the same. Therefore I encourage you to begin a new thread if any questions you wish to ask me do not relate to your OP of what is a miracle. However, its your thread after all and if you don't mind people straying off topic, I don't either, as long as no one decides to accuse me of breaking any rules.
Rule 4 . Stay on the topic of debate. If a topic brings up another issue, start another thread.

Perhaps the real joke is to propose that human lives are affected by supernatural forces of any kind -- including a supposed "unification or dification of us" .

Can you suport that presumption with any evidence?

There is no presumption on my part. Notice the word “perhaps� that begins my statement. That is known as a “qualifier� which denotes the statement is not offered as conclusive – but is suggested as an alternative.

Statements that need qualifiers in case you are wrong are statements that cannot be proved and therefore you have no evidence to support them except for your own wavering opinion which is inconclusive by your own admittance.

There is no assurance that the imagination being expressed here (ye are gods) is any less foolish than the “sky daddy� concept of “god�.

Where is your evidence to support that one persons concept is any more or less foolish than anyone elses concept ?

I have made no such assertion – and make no claim to know “Truth�. Are you attempting to create a straw man?

Not at all but it appears to me that you are with your implication that a statement is foolish when you have nothing but your own unverified opinion to prove it is foolish.

Is the concept of a real person being "Santa Claus" more or less foolish that a persons concept of a magical "Santa Claus" who lives at the north pole?

I take no position regarding the degree of foolishness (or lack thereof) regarding Santa Claus.

It appears to me that you enjoy "sitting on the fence" and not committing to anything.

That is an “interesting� personal perspective – that is presented with a total absence of support – masquerading as “truth�.

Thank you for your own interesting personal perspective which is also presented with a total absence of support.

My support is YOUR posts. Readers are encouraged to look for any support offered for statements in your posts (or any evidence of “Truth�).

Thank you for encouraging people to look.
The wise look beyond outward appearances and they can see the Truth in my posts.

Readers are obviously free to perceive the written word any way they wish regardless of who wrote it.

I agree. That may not be to your advantage.

It may not be to yours either. I already have the advantage since I know the wise can see the Truth in what I write.

Note that opinion, conjecture and unverified clam does NOT equate to demonstration.

Can you demonstrate that statement to be true?

Yes ma’am, I think I can – to those who understand that words come attached to definitions and are not used willy-nilly in reasoned discourse.

Opinion is defined as: “a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter or particular matters: belief stronger than impression and less strong than positive knowledge�

Conjecture is defined as: “inference from defective or presumptive evidence: an inference or conclusion drawn or deduced by surmise or guesswork�

Unverified is defined as: “lacking substantiation�

Claim is defined as: “to assert especially with conviction and in the face of possible contradiction or doubt: an assertion, statement, or implication (as of value, effectiveness, qualification, eligibility) often made or likely to be suspected of being made without adequate justification�

NOTICE that in none of the definitions is there even a suggestion of “demonstration�. Do you disagree?

Can you honestly say that you did not know that opinion, conjecture and unverified claims do not equate to demonstration?

If you cannot honestly say that (which would indicate more than a little naïveté), then your question demonstrates insincerity in debate through deliberate obfuscation.

You have just demonstrated the meanings of the words opinion, conjecture, unverified and claim. Does that equate to demonstration ?
No person can provide logic without a reasoned and reasonable judgment. What some people call opinion and regard as invalid can be perceived as very valid and logical judgment to others.

In my opinion, in order to debate successfully it is wise to understand how your opponent thinks and why they think the way they do.

In my opinion, in order to debate effectively, it is wise to attempt to understand what an “opponent� SAYS (writes in this case).

I make NO attempt to understand how another person THINKS – and certainly not why they think as they do. I respond to what they say since I am neither a mind reader nor an omniscient.

What people write is also usually what they are thinking. If you do not think the words first, you will not write them since you cannot write words if they are not on your mind in the first place. It is not necessary to be a mind reader to know what people are thinking when they write down their thoughts. All you need to do is to be able to read words.
Understanding those words is quite another thing as is evidenced in the written words of the bible. Words can be interpreted in many different ways by readers.

By sharing my thoughts with you I am giving you an advantage which you may chose to accept or reject as you wish.

Any advantage that may accrue to me is certainly not derived from knowledge of your thoughts. Thanks anyway.

You're welcome.

[Flail]

Skyangel wrote:

What people write is also usually what they are thinking. If you do not think the words first, you will not write them since you cannot write words if they are not on your mind in the first place. It is not necessary to be a mind reader to know what people are thinking when they write down their thoughts. All you need to do is to be able to read words.

I completely disagree. A particular author's motive and intent are often not displayed in his/her writings. The author may be attempting to deceive or be parading fiction as fact or be deluded himself. One must know the author and be able to relate his writings in context. This is difficult if not impossible with many unattributed ancient writings or those attributed to 'gods' or unknown authors.

[EduChris]

...the “miracles� were not reported / recorded until decades or generations after their reported occurrence (by people who cannot be shown to have been present)...Could they be similar to the legendary “feats� credited to other “gods�?

Stories of Jesus' miracles are found in all strands of the earliest traditions about Jesus. Before the gospels as we know them were compiled, oral traditions were circulating and other written sources (e.g., Q) were preserved. Jesus' miracle stories were well known during the lifetime of eyewitnesses. Philippians 2:6-11 seems to be a phrase from an early hymn that attributed divinity to Jesus. Had Jesus been just an ordinary man, it's difficult to imagine how such stories would have sprung so quickly.

[Goat]

...the “miracles� were not reported / recorded until decades or generations after their reported occurrence (by people who cannot be shown to have been present)...Could they be similar to the legendary “feats� credited to other “gods�?

Stories of Jesus' miracles are found in all strands of the earliest traditions about Jesus. Before the gospels as we know them were compiled, oral traditions were circulating and other written sources (e.g., Q) were preserved. Jesus' miracle stories were well known during the lifetime of eyewitnesses. Philippians 2:6-11 seems to be a phrase from an early hymn that attributed divinity to Jesus. Had Jesus been just an ordinary man, it's difficult to imagine how such stories would have sprung so quickly.

Rumors and myths develop very quickly, and just because there is a story out there doesn't mean the story happened. Look at all the elvis sightings, and the alien abduction stories out there now.. and the elvis sightings happened in the lifetime of the people who knew him too.

Evidence points to the writer of the Gospel of Mark was never near Jerusalem , since there is the problems with geography, and it appears both Matthew and Luke copied from Mark.

We have no writings from any of the alleged eye witnesses, just claims that they exist.

To me, just looking at how stories grow and get exaggerated in real life in the modern day, I can see how such stories spring to life so quickly.

And, the pattern we see in the stories is that the further away they are from the alleged event, the more detailed they get. This pattern is the pattern of the development of myth, not relaying of reality.

[I AM ALL I AM]

Jesus Father was in Him and He was in the Father. When the Father is in you then you are communicating with the Father within you and the Father communicates with you on the inside, in your mind and heart. When you are ONE with the Father in the same way Jesus is one with the Father you are not separate from the Father at all any more than Jesus was separate from the Father. It's a miracle or a mystery which is understood by those who abide in Him.

G'day Skyangel.

Well there's a convoluted discourse.

Referring to the "heart" in such a manner is poetic only. The heart pumps blood throughout the body.

"When you are ONE" with something, you are never separate from it, so there can be no "at all any more" as a qualifier of no longer being separate. Either you are "ONE" with that thing or you are not. Claims of being separated from 'God' is a tool of religion used to make people fearful and manipulate them into thinking that they are required to do something to 'bridge' this separation. Your discourse follows the same premise.

As to the "a miracle or a mystery" remark, from another book ...

[center]Forget mystery and accept love. There's no mystery about love. It comes from life.

Paul Muad’Dib

Dune Messiah

Frank Herbert[/center]

[Skyangel]

Skyangel wrote:

What people write is also usually what they are thinking. If you do not think the words first, you will not write them since you cannot write words if they are not on your mind in the first place. It is not necessary to be a mind reader to know what people are thinking when they write down their thoughts. All you need to do is to be able to read words.

I completely disagree. A particular author's motive and intent are often not displayed in his/her writings. The author may be attempting to deceive or be parading fiction as fact or be deluded himself. One must know the author and be able to relate his writings in context. This is difficult if not impossible with many unattributed ancient writings or those attributed to 'gods' or unknown authors.

That's an interesting view point. Maybe you would like to discuss it with me on http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 956#316956

If we relate it to the bible and understand the definition of the word miracle as "any amazing or wonderful occurrence "
and defining "wonderful" as "extraordinarily good or great"
Is a piece of writing that can be interpreted in so many different ways a wonderful occurrence (miracle) as in being an extraordinary piece of literature?
How many other pieces of literature cause so much controversy, confusion, debates, etc in this world? How many other pieces of literature can be interpreted in so many ways?
Regardless of whether we know who the authors of the 66 books of the bible were or not, in my opinion their literature is a work of genius which has survived the test of time and is still one of the best selling books of all time in the world.