nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Miracles...

kelly1

Hello again!

I'm currently reading a book about St. Padre Pio (my 2nd book on him). He's an absolutely fascinating man. In the modern age he appears to be associated with more miracles than any other saint.

Up to a few months ago I was a bit wary of relics until I read in the New Testament that disciples of the Apostles were taking away items such as scarves and other items of their clothing and were blessing sick people with these items and these people were subsequently cured.

Padre Pio's gloves/mittens (numerous pairs) and bandages have been used countless times to heal people of all sort of serious illnesses in cases where the doctors could do no more.

So my question is, if you, as an atheist, were to hear a convincing case of a miracle cure of an "incurable" disease, would it bring you any closer to believing in God? If you went to a surgeon who told you that someone had an inoperable brain tumor and that it disappeared following the placement of one of Padre Pio's gloves on their head, would this make any difference to your stance on God? Assume that the doctors has the scans and xray etc to prove that the tumor had disappeared.

BTW, you probably already know that before and Blessed can be canonized, it must be demonstrated that that at least two miracles occurred as a result of the saints intercession. The Vatican as far as I know has a panel of doctors who review scientifically each case brought before to decide whether the cure was beyond the limits of science. Just an FYI...

God bless,
Noel.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Zillah

Miracles and relics have never cured anything that couldn't have just gone away on its own. If we really are talking about divine intervention then there's no reason why Padre Pio's relics couldn't make someone's leg grow back, or reverse the debilitating effects of Down Syndrome.

Also, even if a relic does make an amputee's limbs come back all we know is that x brought back the leg, there's still no evidence that any sort of God had anything to do with it, all we know is that something weird happened.

5uspect

http://www.whydoesgodhateamputees.com/ tbh

kelly1

Zillah wrote: »

Miracles and relics have never cured anything that couldn't have just gone away on its own.

What scientific evidence do you have for this claim? Can a brain tumour disappear over-night or a faulty heart valve fix itself?

Zillah wrote: »

If we really are talking about divine intervention then there's no reason why Padre Pio's relics couldn't make someone's leg grow back, or reverse the debilitating effects of Down Syndrome.

That doesn't detract from "lesser" miracles. One miracles involved a patient who was about to have his leg amputated due to lack of blood flow and he was cured.

Zillah wrote: »

Also, even if a relic does make an amputee's limbs come back all we know is that x brought back the leg, there's still no evidence that any sort of God had anything to do with it, all we know is that something weird happened.

Seriously think about it from a scientific perpective. One day an x-ray shows a brain tumour, the next day it's gone. You can't just say "that weird" and ignore what just happened. Would you not look for an explanation? Why do these miracles always(?) follow after some kind of act of faith in the power of God? Does the body somehow over-ride the laws of science??

Pompey Magnus

The Vatican as far as I know has a panel of doctors who review scientifically each case brought before to decide whether the cure was beyond the limits of science.

Wow, so paranormal events have been scientifically proven to happen? I must have missed that in every peer reviewed scientific journal.

I'm not saying that people don't have unexpected cures when it looked like they were doomed to die, I'm just saying it had nothing to do with some relic. I would guess for every million people who are dying and use some relic as a last chance only a tiny, tiny handful would survive. All the rest die as expected. The survivers then claim it is a miracle and the relic saved them when in fact it was just probability.

Derren Brown had a programme on Channel 4 a couple of weeks ago about an apparent foolproof plan at winning in gambling. I won't ruin the ending if you haven't seen it but the principle is exactly the same as supposed miracle cures.

As a side point, I read somewhere recently that stigmata had historically always appeared on the palms of the hand, however since recent research showed that a crucified body could not be supported by nails through the palm but instead required a wrist entry, the occurance of people with wrist located stigmata has dramatically increased. Wierd that.

kelly1

Depeche_Mode wrote: »

Wow, so paranormal events have been scientifically proven to happen? I must have missed that in every peer reviewed scientific journal.

Please don't misconstrue what I'm saying.

Depeche_Mode wrote: »

I'm not saying that people don't have unexpected cures when it looked like they were doomed to die, I'm just saying it had nothing to do with some relic.

That's just your opinion, isn't it?

Depeche_Mode wrote: »

I would guess for every million people who are dying and use some relic as a last chance only a tiny, tiny handful would survive. All the rest die as expected. They then claim it is a miracle and the relic saved them when in fact it was just probability.

Would you like to guess the probability of a brain tumour disappearing over-night? 0 wouldn't you say?

Depeche_Mode wrote: »

As a side point, I read somewhere recently that stigmata had historically always appeared on the palms of the hand, however since recent research showed that a crucified body could not be supported by nails through the palm but instead required a wrist entry, the occurance of people with wrist located stigmata has dramatically increased. Wierd that.

Jesus could have been nailed through the hands because He was also supported by His feet thereby relieving the strain on His hands. I saw a documentary about this on Discovery.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

Padre Pio's gloves/mittens (numerous pairs) and bandages have been used countless times to heal people of all sort of serious illnesses in cases where the doctors could do no more.

They have have they :rolleyes:

kelly1 wrote: »

So my question is, if you, as an atheist, were to hear a convincing case of a miracle cure of an "incurable" disease, would it bring you any closer to believing in God?

No. What does it have to do with God anyway?

kelly1 wrote: »

The Vatican as far as I know has a panel of doctors who review scientifically each case brought before to decide whether the cure was beyond the limits of science. Just an FYI...

We don't understand it so it must have been a miracle attributed to the person we are looking at?

Well that is just silly.

seamus

What scientific evidence do you have for this claim?

You can't disprove that something exists. The obligation is on you to provide evidence that these "miracles" have happened. And a third-party account on a Christian website doesn't count as evidence.

kelly1 wrote: »

Would you like to guess the probability of a brain tumour disappearing over-night? 0 wouldn't you say?

Can you provide evidence of brain tumours disappearing literally overnight?

There is a lot we don't know about. That doesn't mean when something unknown rears its head, it must be "God". A few thousand years ago, thunderstorms were attributed to an "angry God" purely because we didn't know how or why thunderstorms happened. Similarly, when someone's body spontaneously heals something like a tumour, it's ridiculous to say, "We don't know why that happened. It must have been God".

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

Seriously think about it from a scientific perpective. One day an x-ray shows a brain tumour, the next day it's gone. You can't just say "that weird" and ignore what just happened. Would you not look for an explanation? Why do these miracles always(?) follow after some kind of act of faith in the power of God?

They don't, that is the point.

How many people haven't been cured who went to Catholic relics for the cure?

How many people have been "cured" who never went near a Catholic relic?

If you tell people that something or other cures sick people you get a huge amount of sick people going to view that things. Out of that large population set you are bound to get some people who have funny things happen to them. Does that demonstrated that the religious relic actually did anything? No of course not. Because funny things happen to the ones who don't go near these relics.

People have been "cured" of things like tumors by going to Hindu priests, drinking Tibetan holy water, swimming in magical South American rivers etc etc. And far far more haven't.

If 1000 people go to a Tibetan shrine and 1 of them is cured people say "Wow, the Tibetan shrine must have done that", because their wishful thinking is joining the dots. They ignore the 999 who weren't "cured", strongly suggesting that what ever happened was nothing to do with the Tibetan shrine.

What you end up with is simply anomalies that are given significance by people desperate for hope that something beyond their power can be controlled and fixed.

Pompey Magnus

kelly1 wrote: »

Please don't misconstrue what I'm saying.

I'm not trying to misconstrue what you said and I am no expert in medicine, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of experts in science and medicine do not believe in miracles and they can usually find down to earth explanations for these cases. For any that they don't understand they don't jump to the conclusion that a miracle has happened, they accept that they have not got a complete knowledge of the workings of the human body and immune system so they use these cases to investigate and hopefully expand their knowledge.

That's just your opinion, isn't it?

It is an opinion, I reckon it to be pretty reasonable too.

Would you like to guess the probability of a brain tumour disappearing over-night? 0 wouldn't you say?

I wouldn't have a clue but from my very limited knowledge it does seem very, very unlikely. Has this actually happened?

Jesus could have been nailed through the hands because He was also supported by His feet thereby relieving the strain on His hands. I saw a documentary about this on Discovery.

There has only been one archaeological discovery of a crucified body from the Roman Empire, in Jerusalem dating back to roughly the time of Jesus and this man was nailed through the wrists and heels.

Out of interest would nailing through the wrist not fit better with Christian teaching which says Jesus dies without a bone in his body being broken? A nail through the palm is sure to break bone but between the radius and ulna around the wrist would not. Of course the nails through the feet would be harder to explain away.

Sapien

kelly1 wrote: »

The Vatican as far as I know has a panel of doctors who review scientifically each case brought before to decide whether the cure was beyond the limits of science. Just an FYI...

Here's another FYI for you, Noel. The position of Advocatus Diaboli - the canon lawyer appointed to oppose the canonisation of a candidate by arguing skepticism - was established in 1587 by Sixtus V, and abolished in 1983 by John Paul II. The abolition massively increased the rate of canonisations and beatifications by the Church, suggesting that the role of Advocatus Diaboli previously had a marked effect on the likelihood of a canonisation bid being successful.

Padre Pio was, as I'm sure you know, beatified and canonised under this new and much less taxing process.

Dave!

If an amputee grows an arm or leg back to full functionality then I'll certainly sit up and pay attention.

The only miracle here that I see is that people actually believe this stuff.

Padre Pio's gloves/mittens (numerous pairs) and bandages have been used countless times to heal people of all sort of serious illnesses in cases where the doctors could do no more.

I think that Pio's mittens should be brought to Dublin and put in a room. All devout Catholics can go there rather than a hospital for their treatment, after all if they're proven to work then the only reason they wouldn't would be if God didn't want the person healed. It would save millions from the HSE's budget - I say go for it.

And it's worth pointing out that from my perspective, knowing as I do that God does not inflict stigmata on people, and that there is no natural explanation for these types of injuries, this makes Padre Pio most likely a liar and a fraud in my book, but the possibility exists that he was perhaps just insane.

The founder of Rome's Catholic university hospital concluded Padre Pio was "an ignorant and self-mutilating psychopath who exploited people's credulity."[14] In short, he was accused of infractions against all three of his monastic vows: poverty, chastity and obedience.[13]

In 1923, he was forbidden to teach teenage boys in the school attached to the monastery because he was considered "a noxious Socrates, capable of perverting the fragile lives and souls of boys."[15]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pio_of_Pietrelcina

robindch

DaveMcG wrote: »

If an amputee grows an arm or leg back to full functionality then I'll certainly sit up and pay attention.

I'll do it for a finger or even a toe. Hell, even a cure for baldness would do.

toiletduck

5uspect wrote: »

http://www.whydoesgodhateamputees.com/ tbh

Damn, beat me to it! What do theists have to say on it I wonder?

CerebralCortex

Nothing short of God herself (I imagine she is very good looking) appearing in front of me and explaining exactly how she created the universe would get me to believe she exists and even then I would have trouble accepting her as a being to be worshiped.

Zillah

kelly1 wrote: »

What scientific evidence do you have for this claim? Can a brain tumour disappear over-night or a faulty heart valve fix itself?

Its not for me to prove it didn't happen, its for the people making the claim to prove it did. I have serious doubts as to the legitimacy of a claim that shows a tumor vanishing over night, but if some genuinely competant doctors/scientists confirm that a tumor vanished over night then I will sit up and say "Wow, thats really interesting". But its still not evidence for the Biblical God. Weird **** happens all the time, for many different reasons. A christians says it was God, a witch claims it was the earth mother, a psychic claims it was her healing powers, you're all just making up answers. Until I see solid evidence that
A - These things happened
and
B - That it was the Christian God that caused them
...then I'm not going to take it as evidence for His existence.

That doesn't detract from "lesser" miracles. One miracles involved a patient who was about to have his leg amputated due to lack of blood flow and he was cured.

Ah, but it does detract. Why would the omnipotent creator of the universe be limited to lesser miracles? If someone is worthy why doesn't he grow their leg back for them? Your proposal is that God is performing these acts, and yet he never seems to cross the line into acts that would clearly show it was He that performed them. Occams Razor states that your hypothesis is a very bad one.

Seriously think about it from a scientific perpective. One day an x-ray shows a brain tumour, the next day it's gone. You can't just say "that weird" and ignore what just happened. Would you not look for an explanation?

I do look for an explanation. If there is no evidence for what caused it then I can't reach a conclusion. Religious believers simply invent an explanation that fits their beliefs, but its completely fabricated.

Why do these miracles always(?) follow after some kind of act of faith in the power of God?

They don't. People get cured from unlikely illnesses every day. Believers just like to focus on the ones that they can interpret as evidence for their God.

Could you please give us some links to medical cases that were scientically analysed and the conclusion was that there was no non-supernatural explanation for what happened?

toiletduck

Kelly1 perhaps you could explain who and why God choses to be cured? My Mum who is recovering from ovarian cancer, and has been a devout, practicing Catholic all her life, got blessed with some relic of Padre Pio before Christmas. It had no effect, in fact she was sicker than ever over the next month. Miracles are a bit funny that way, there doesn't seem to be any consistency.

Dades

kelly1 wrote: »

If you went to a surgeon who told you that someone had an inoperable brain tumor and that it disappeared following the placement of one of Padre Pio's gloves on their head, would this make any difference to your stance on God?

An occurrence like that would certainly be food for thought. That would throw logic out the window. It would have to be verified by a doctor not under the payroll of the Vatican though!

But tbh a "miracle" like that raises more questions than it answers. Why the complete randomness of the recipient of said miracle? Aren't there millions of people in need of a miracle that never get it? Not to mention why does God intervene through a pair of mittens...

Pompey Magnus

Dades wrote: »

Not to mention why does God intervene through a pair of mittens...

That is a very good point, why does God determine who gets healed just by their interaction with a physical object? Would he have not healed them without this?

Zillah

Why the mittens? People love magic objects. Duh.

Juju sticks, bones, wands, crosses etc

toiletduck wrote: »

Kelly1 perhaps you could explain who and why God choses to be cured? My Mum who is recovering from ovarian cancer, and has been a devout, practicing Catholic all her life, got blessed with some relic of Padre Pio before Christmas. It had no effect, in fact she was sicker than ever over the next month. Miracles are a bit funny that way, there doesn't seem to be any consistency.

This is an excellent point and one that few religious people ever address.

Let's take a hypothetical person, suffering from cancer, who believes in god and has led a good life. Unless Noel is claiming that these mittens cure *everyone* there exists those who have prayed and touched relics who aren't cured. What are you saying to these people in the midst of their painful treatment? "Yea cancer sucks and God hates you"?

It's like when a religious person tries to comfort grieving relatives, it's always "Ahh sure they're in a better place now". What? How do you know?

If they spoke honestly based on their belief in Christian doctrine then all they could say is "How good have they been? cos there's a small chance they're in Heaven, but the chances are they're just started eternal torment in hell, there there, stop your sobbing"

robindch

toiletduck wrote: »

My Mum [...] got blessed with some relic of Padre Pio before Christmas. It had no effect

Er, was that Pio's glove, available from hardline catholic sources in Dublin somewhere?

My brother met this a few years back, when he woke up from a dangerous tumor-op some to find a female relative waving some of Pio's winter-wear over him. But it did have an effect -- he went berserk, and the glove was put away hurriedly. We knew that he'd recovered from the op at that point, so it wasn't all bad.

Popinjay

pH wrote: »

"How good have they been? cos there's a small chance they're in Heaven, but the chances are they're just started eternal torment in hell, there there, stop your sobbing"

Thanks, I feel better already.:rolleyes:

To be entirely fair, there are enough fire and brimstone believers out there saying exactly that, or even "Hah! They're in hell and I bet they're sorry now!". It doesn't necessarily put bums on seats though and churches cost a packet to heat - draughty.

kelly1

seamus wrote: »

You can't disprove that something exists. The obligation is on you to provide evidence that these "miracles" have happened.

Can you provide evidence of brain tumours disappearing literally overnight?

No, I can't provide because I'm not a doctor and I don't hold medical records. You would hardly deny that there have been thousands of unexplainable medical "impossibilities" would you? If you don't deny this, have you thought about how this might occur? Do you think it's just another thing that science will one day provide an explanation for? Wouldn't the disappearance of a tumour over-night raise very fundamental questions on basic biological principles/understanding?

seamus wrote: »

There is a lot we don't know about. That doesn't mean when something unknown rears its head, it must be "God".

I agree but I believe miracles are another pointer to the existence of God. Personally I believe miracles do happen by the power of God but of course that's no proof but surely it would be strong evidence for supernatural occurences?

kelly1

Wicknight wrote: »

They don't, that is the point.

How many people haven't been cured who went to Catholic relics for the cure?

How many people have been "cured" who never went near a Catholic relic?

If you tell people that something or other cures sick people you get a huge amount of sick people going to view that things. Out of that large population set you are bound to get some people who have funny things happen to them. Does that demonstrated that the religious relic actually did anything? No of course not. Because funny things happen to the ones who don't go near these relics.

People have been "cured" of things like tumors by going to Hindu priests, drinking Tibetan holy water, swimming in magical South American rivers etc etc. And far far more haven't.

If 1000 people go to a Tibetan shrine and 1 of them is cured people say "Wow, the Tibetan shrine must have done that", because their wishful thinking is joining the dots. They ignore the 999 who weren't "cured", strongly suggesting that what ever happened was nothing to do with the Tibetan shrine.

What you end up with is simply anomalies that are given significance by people desperate for hope that something beyond their power can be controlled and fixed.

You seem to be side-stepping the main point I'm making. Unexplained medical impossibilities do happen. You're not going to deny this are you? Biologically/scientifically speaking, these occurrances are impossible. Can you offer any kind of explanation other than to say it's just another think that science doesn't yet understand? We're not talking about quantum physics here, it's Newtonian.

seamus

kelly1 wrote: »

No, I can't provide because I'm not a doctor and I don't hold medical records. You would hardly deny that there have been thousands of unexplainable medical "impossibilities" would you? If you don't deny this, have you thought about how this might occur? Do you think it's just another thing that science will one day provide an explanation for? Wouldn't the disappearance of a tumour over-night raise very fundamental questions on basic biological principles/understanding?

I'm really glad you put the impossibilities in quotes. Because that's the key - something that appears impossible now may not be impossible in 10 or twenty years time. To say that something is impossible is to say that we simply don't know how to do it yet, not that it can never ever be done.

You have yet to provide anything whatsoever about this phantom disappearing tumour. Yes, such an occurence would raise huge questions, but ultimately they are questions which could be answered.

I agree but I believe miracles are another pointer to the existence of God. Personally I believe miracles do happen by the power of God but of course that's no proof but surely it would be strong evidence for supernatural occurences?

So, you agree with me that something odd occuring doesn't obviously point to God, but at the same time you think that odd happenings are surely strong evidence for God having interfered? Do you not see the contradiction?

Myksyk

kelly1 wrote: »

Padre Pio's gloves/mittens (numerous pairs) and bandages have been used countless times to heal people of all sort of serious illnesses in cases where the doctors could do no more.

This is such a specific claim with reference to "countless" examples that you surely have to hand specific evidence of this which we could read and evaluate.

Otherwise, it's just another example of credulous acceptance of what amounts to theological gossip.

kelly1

Dades wrote: »

An occurrence like that would certainly be food for thought. That would throw logic out the window. It would have to be verified by a doctor not under the payroll of the Vatican though!

If I got the name and address/phone num of a doctor who has witnessed a miracle, would you be interested in talking with him/her?

Dades wrote: »

But tbh a "miracle" like that raises more questions than it answers. Why the complete randomness of the recipient of said miracle? Aren't there millions of people in need of a miracle that never get it? Not to mention why does God intervene through a pair of mittens...

It's God's prerogative who He wants to heal and when. And not everybody prays for a miracle and those who pray don't always have strong faith. Some people learn from their illnesses and this is ultimately for their good. I don't know why God uses relics but it's more to do with the favour that the Saint has won with God, their power of intercession. Jesus often used material things when performing miracles e.g. mud to heal a blind man.

Depeche_Mode wrote: »

That is a very good point, why does God determine who gets healed just by their interaction with a physical object? Would he have not healed them without this?

Again, good question.

I just discovered how multiquote works!

Ekancone

kelly1 wrote: »

Hello again!

I'm currently reading a book about St. Padre Pio (my 2nd book on him). He's an absolutely fascinating man. In the modern age he appears to be associated with more miracles than any other saint.

Up to a few months ago I was a bit wary of relics until I read in the New Testament that disciples of the Apostles were taking away items such as scarves and other items of their clothing and were blessing sick people with these items and these people were subsequently cured.

Padre Pio's gloves/mittens (numerous pairs) and bandages have been used countless times to heal people of all sort of serious illnesses in cases where the doctors could do no more.

So my question is, if you, as an atheist, were to hear a convincing case of a miracle cure of an "incurable" disease, would it bring you any closer to believing in God? If you went to a surgeon who told you that someone had an inoperable brain tumor and that it disappeared following the placement of one of Padre Pio's gloves on their head, would this make any difference to your stance on God? Assume that the doctors has the scans and xray etc to prove that the tumor had disappeared.

BTW, you probably already know that before and Blessed can be canonized, it must be demonstrated that that at least two miracles occurred as a result of the saints intercession. The Vatican as far as I know has a panel of doctors who review scientifically each case brought before to decide whether the cure was beyond the limits of science. Just an FYI...

God bless,
Noel.

This video may interest you, the first minute or so in particular:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnj7PlqmJ5o&feature=related

karen3212

The fact that a tumour grew to a certain size in the first place means the immune system was malfunctioning. I think you are talking about unexplained regressions, as in we don't know why the immune system of a person woke up one morning and said 'ah a tumour, we need to get rid of it, who let that tumour grow to that size?' The immune system is supposed to kill off cancerous cells, so I can't see it as being such a huge miracle that the immune system somehow started to respond suddenly. Having said that, I think it's fairly rare, but I don't know how many cases there have been.