Innocence of miracles

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Innocence of miracles

Post #1

Post by Willum »

Let's examine some assumptions about God's wisdom and miracles:

God is all knowing, therefore, we can assume that (assuming he exists), he understands the consequence and impact of his actions.

Resurrection: We'll define this as the reversal of decay processes that have occurred over three days, conversion to gases, digestion by bacteria, and all that unpleasantness.
It is basically impossible, without breaking the laws of physics for anything to do this. We can also assume that Gods laws which he can't or won't break, include the laws of physics.

Turning water into wine:
Water is hydrogen and oxygen.
Wine is carbon, nitrogen, minerals, and so on...
It would require NUCLEAR reactions as profound as Nagasaki to engineer these changes. Not impossible, or against any laws of physics but still... a great deal of trouble.

In their time, and up to 300 years later, these miracles did not have the desired effect, nor were they well documented or announced.

In this light, isn't it more likely that a wise God would use means that were actually effective to spread the word, instead of means that are extraordinarily difficult, and...

Since we can consider other, more effective miracles, why wouldn't he use those? - without the danger of a nuclear meltdown? :)

Isn't it more likely that those people drafting these miracles were simply innocent or naive to the challenges they were setting God up to?

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Innocence of miracles

Post #2

Post by Divine Insight »

Willum wrote: In their time, and up to 300 years later, these miracles did not have the desired effect, nor were they well documented or announced.
For me, this is all I need to know. And they actually didn't have their desired effect for over 2000+ years.

We can ignore any physics entirely. I'll grant that an all-wise omnipotent God could indeed perform these miracles without any problem at all. In fact, that's easy to do if we assume the universe is a computer simulation. As a computer programmer I am well aware of how easy it is to break the "laws of physics" of a currently running program to do things that would not normally occur.

So any argument that these miracles would be in any way difficult for an omnipotent God to perform is a lost argument. If we assume that an omnipotent God exists, then performing these miracles would be a piece of cake. No problem at all.

So the ONLY relevant question is whether these actions were wise, or effective. Clearly they were neither wise, nor effective, even by this religion's own decree.

So there you go. Any God who did these ridiculous things cannot be all-wise. Such a God would necessarily be extremely inept in terms of knowing how to solve problems.

Therefore we can ignore the physics entirely. These religious fables are clearly false. They are just very poorly thought out, and quite ignorant, man-made tales. That should be obvious to everyone IMHO.

Why there exist people who actually think these tales make sense is the real mystery to me.

A God who "sacrifices" himself or his only begotten demigod son for the purpose of offering undeserved amnesty to sinners that he was more than happy to drown out in a flood at an earlier time?

That makes no sense.

Plus, even according to these religious fables, only a few souls will be saved anyway. So would be an extremely desperate act on the part of a creator God who looses the vast majority of human souls he creates to eternal damnation.

In short, the Biblical God is necessarily an extremely inept and inefficient creator. There's just no getting around it. He creates far more souls that he condemns to eternal condemnation than he "saves". And even those he "saves" don't even deserve their salvation. He only grants them undeserved salvation if they are willing to condone having him (or his demigod son) brutally crucified on their behalf.

In other words, not only does he save a few undeserved sinners, but he actually saves the worst people possible. He'll only save those who are willing to accept having his supposedly innocent son brutally beaten and crucified on their behalf.

Decent people, like myself, who cannot condone such brutal ignorance, will be cast into hell because I won't condone this hideous act. So many of the best people end up going to hell simply because they reject the extremely ignorant and immoral behavior of this God.

Let's all hope that this is indeed nothing more than a very sick man-made fable. It would be horrible if we had actually been created by such an ignorant and brutal God who expect us to condone having an innocent demigod butchered to offer us undeserved amnesty from sins.

How can anyone not see that as being absolutely sick? :-k
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Innocence of miracles

Post #3

Post by Willum »

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

Goodness, something DI and I disagree on - I will have to tread carefully! :)

Well, now consider the modern vs classic audiences.
Modern folks know that nuclear reactions are phenomenal.
Classic thinks that nuclear transformations are just as miraculous as plants growing.

Then we have God's laws, even in a computer program, what are the conditions for when he breaks them? Whenever it is convenient to prove the religion?

So you may waive the "God can do anything argument," is reasonable for the omnipotent... but then you miss all the other things an omnipotent could do, and doesn't.

You'd then have to assume that God is an idiot. He's have to be an omnipotent idiot, for consistency.

So I am not saying your points are incorrect, to the contrary, they are divine, as always.
But to examine the case of claims the claims of folks who are unaware of the challenges of thermodynamics (and in my opinion, even an omnipotent creature can't raise the three-day dead), or nuclear science, there is the question of the being acting rationally according to his own rules.

If God has rules about remaining invisible, then surely things like gravity and physics must have some importance?

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Innocence of miracles

Post #4

Post by Divine Insight »

Willum wrote: Well, now consider the modern vs classic audiences.
Modern folks know that nuclear reactions are phenomenal.
Classic thinks that nuclear transformations are just as miraculous as plants growing.
If our universe is a computer simulation then God, as the programmer, could violate the laws of physics for any objects within the universe anytime he so desired. So changing water into wine would not even require a nuclear reaction because, as the programmer, God could just swap out the water molecules with carbon molecules without any physical reaction required.

If our universe is a computer simulation, then all arguments against miracles based on objections due to the laws of physics fail. That wouldn't even be relevant.

Willum wrote: Then we have God's laws, even in a computer program, what are the conditions for when he breaks them? Whenever it is convenient to prove the religion?
He breaks them whenever he wants to. That could hardly be used to prove the religion though since it would be impossible to prove that a God exists who even wants to do anything. So it's not useful as a proof of God or the religion. Physical objections simply can't be used to disprove the religion, that's all. So using physics to argue against the Bible is futile.
Willum wrote: You'd then have to assume that God is an idiot. He's have to be an omnipotent idiot, for consistency.
BINGO!

That's the answer right there! Exactly my point.

No physics required to prove that the Biblical God does not exist.

Why? Because he would indeed need to be an idiot, and that's incompatible with the omnipotence and infinite wisdom he's supposed to possess.

So we have our proof that the God of the Bible does not exist after all.

And no physicists were harmed in the process. :D
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Innocence of miracles

Post #5

Post by Willum »

[Replying to post 4 by Divine Insight]

As far as it being a program - well, then water and wine wouldn't need explanations, such as molecules. Nothing beyond the superficial would have any need for explanation...
He breaks them whenever he wants to. That could hardly be used to prove the religion though since it would be impossible to prove that a God exists who even wants to do anything. So it's not useful as a proof of God or the religion. Physical objections simply can't be used to disprove the religion, that's all. So using physics to argue against the Bible is futile.
Now hold on - if God breaks rules whenever he wants to, then the Jewish covenant is meaningless, the Christian covenant is meaningless, anything regarding God, or indeed, granting the myth, anything regarding reality can not be relied upon, because, "God will break the rules whenever he wants to."

You can't have a religion in such an environment!

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Re: Innocence of miracles

Post #6

Post by Divine Insight »

Willum wrote:
He breaks them whenever he wants to. That could hardly be used to prove the religion though since it would be impossible to prove that a God exists who even wants to do anything. So it's not useful as a proof of God or the religion. Physical objections simply can't be used to disprove the religion, that's all. So using physics to argue against the Bible is futile.
Now hold on - if God breaks rules whenever he wants to, then the Jewish covenant is meaningless, the Christian covenant is meaningless, anything regarding God, or indeed, granting the myth, anything regarding reality can not be relied upon, because, "God will break the rules whenever he wants to."

You can't have a religion in such an environment!
Sorry, but that argument doesn't work either. God doesn't have a covenant with anyone concerning how he decides to program the universe. Just because we call the behavior we see most of the time the "Laws of Physics" doesn't mean that God made a promise to anyone that he would uphold only those specific laws of physics.

So no, you can't demand that God must honor the "Laws of Physics" that we have come up with. Those so-called "laws" are nothing more than a record of what we have observed and expect to continue to observe. God has no covenant with us concerning our "Laws of Physics".

However, since you brought this up, it also make no sense to say that God had a "covenant" with the Jewish people, unless he did indeed have an agreement with each and every individual. He certainly has no covenant with anyone he hasn't communicated with directly. And neither do they have a covenant with him.

And besides, even if this God did have a covenant with each individual person of a particular culture, that still doesn't justify him acting like a complete idiot. An omnipotent omniscient all-wise God has no excuse for doing stupid things. So even if this God had a covenant with someone it wouldn't save this obviously false mythology.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11467
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 327 times
Been thanked: 374 times

Re: Innocence of miracles

Post #7

Post by 1213 »

Willum wrote:Turning water into wine:
Water is hydrogen and oxygen.
Wine is carbon, nitrogen, minerals, and so on...
It would require NUCLEAR reactions as profound as Nagasaki to engineer these changes. Not impossible, or against any laws of physics but still... a great deal of trouble.
It would be nice to know how Jesus did it. I think there are can be other ways than nuclear. After all, if God created by his word, wouldn’t it be easy to turn water in to wine by similar way?

Anyway, if you don’t know how it is done, it doesn’t mean that someone else could not know easier way than nuclear power.

User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Innocence of miracles

Post #8

Post by Willum »

[Replying to post 7 by 1213]

If you know a better way than nuclear, then spill it.
Did he just slip in some vodka and Kool-aid from a secret pouch?
Then he lied.

Word? Word has no power here. That's like saying "Superman." Or magic.

But like I say, if you know another way, or would like to explain how even an omnipotent creature can resurrect something, we're all ears.

Until that time, you must accept that it is just a fable clouded in 1st century ignorance.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21142
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 794 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Innocence of miracles

Post #9

Post by JehovahsWitness »

[Replying to post 1 by Willum]

So is your basic argument that miracles cannot happen because in order for them to happen it would take a miracle? Isn't that a bit like saying orange can't be orange because that would be too orangy?

Image

JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Innocence of miracles

Post #10

Post by Willum »

[Replying to post 9 by JehovahsWitness]

No, you have misconstrued the point to something it is not.

I find that many religious people do this very often as a tactic in essentially changing the subject from one that destroys their religion into a nonsense one that allows it to survive, at least in their own minds.

It will probably help to review other poster's responses to the OP, in order to make your own somewhere near germane.

If I were to break it down for you, all miracles are not created equal. Unless you assume that your God is an idiot, who thinks is is just as easy to blacken the Sun as turn off a light switch, or perform a resurrection as opposed to using some reasonable/verifiable means of persuasion, then you must conclude that God is a fiction.

Post Reply