Have you ever had a religious or supernatural experience?

[The Puppeteer]

I've had many. For me to deny these experiences would be the equivalence of denying reality. Whether I'm completely mad or not is a different story entirely.

[Del Tachi]

The simple act of being a human and thinking/questioning our place in the universe is a religious experience. 

Hearing directly from God or seeing visions of angels...no I've never experienced anything like that, but that's a quite narrow way to define a "religious experience." 

[It Was Predetermined That You Would Read This Username]

These poll results are horrifying.

[¿]

These poll results are horrifying.

Not everything can be explained away conventionally.

[Kingpoleon]

These poll results are horrifying.

Facts are and remain the great enemy of the fundamentalist materialist.

[It Was Predetermined That You Would Read This Username]

These poll results are horrifying.

Facts are and remain the great enemy of the fundamentalist materialist.

And confusing anecdotes with facts remains the fatal flaw of the superstitious.

[1,066,892 Likud voters can't be wrong!]

These poll results are horrifying.

Put another way, have you ever had a weird experience of some kind or another you still can't quite explain? My experience has been that even the most committed atheists and materialists usually have, just as even the most committed religious people have usually had doubts at some point.

[It Was Predetermined That You Would Read This Username]

These poll results are horrifying.

Put another way, have you ever had a weird experience of some kind or another you still can't quite explain? My experience has been that even the most committed atheists and materialists usually have, just as even the most committed religious people have usually had doubts at some point.

No. But then again, I've never done drugs, so that probably helps.

[Kingpoleon]

And confusing anecdotes with facts remains the fatal flaw of the superstitious.

The odds are decidedly not in your favor. Craig Keener’s estimate of 100 million miracles in the last hundred years is such a large number that the odds of all of them being false or naturally explainable is roughly equivalent to the odds that George Washington was not a historical person.

[It Was Predetermined That You Would Read This Username]

And confusing anecdotes with facts remains the fatal flaw of the superstitious.

The odds are decidedly not in your favor. Craig Keener’s estimate of 100 million miracles in the last hundred years is such a large number that the odds of all of them being false or naturally explainable is roughly equivalent to the odds that George Washington was not a historical person.

Craig Keener is a lunatic, and citing him as a source is proof-in-itself that you are not serious about discussing this subject.

[1,066,892 Likud voters can't be wrong!]

These poll results are horrifying.

Put another way, have you ever had a weird experience of some kind or another you still can't quite explain? My experience has been that even the most committed atheists and materialists usually have, just as even the most committed religious people have usually had doubts at some point.

No. But then again, I've never done drugs, so that probably helps.

This response is absurdly self-congratulatory and unprovokedly hostile to other posters, even by your standards. 8/10, would rage again.

[It Was Predetermined That You Would Read This Username]

These poll results are horrifying.

Put another way, have you ever had a weird experience of some kind or another you still can't quite explain? My experience has been that even the most committed atheists and materialists usually have, just as even the most committed religious people have usually had doubts at some point.

No. But then again, I've never done drugs, so that probably helps.

This response is absurdly self-congratulatory and unprovokedly hostile to other posters, even by your standards. 8/10, would rage again.

Yeah, I was pretty proud of it.

[Cocaine Khrushchev]

And confusing anecdotes with facts remains the fatal flaw of the superstitious.

The odds are decidedly not in your favor. Craig Keener’s estimate of 100 million miracles in the last hundred years is such a large number that the odds of all of them being false or naturally explainable is roughly equivalent to the odds that George Washington was not a historical person.

How the f##k would you even calculate that. I'm calling BS

[Kingpoleon]

Craig Keener is a lunatic, and citing him as a source is proof-in-itself that you are not serious about discussing this subject.

Keener is a pretty competent writer. I think it is a decidedly serious problem that, unless we presume odds of miracles are at precisely zero percent, it is highly unlikely that all miraculous claims are false.

“Miracles always relate to the faith. That is why a belief in miracles is not a vacation from reason, a little holiday from the tedious demands of rational responsibility. Not only is it reasonable to believe that miracles can and do happen, it is unreasonable to think they cannot and do not occur.” - Ralph McInerny

“Claims for the occurrence of miraculous events will have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. There can be no general theory to cover the character of unique events, but the refusal to contemplate the possibility of revelatory disclosures of an unprecedented kind would be an unacceptable limitation, imposed arbitrarily on the horizons of religious thought.” - John Polkinghorne

[Cocaine Khrushchev]

Craig Keener is a lunatic, and citing him as a source is proof-in-itself that you are not serious about discussing this subject.

Keener is a pretty competent writer. I think it is a decidedly serious problem that, unless we presume odds of miracles are at precisely zero percent, it is highly unlikely that all miraculous claims are false.

“Miracles always relate to the faith. That is why a belief in miracles is not a vacation from reason, a little holiday from the tedious demands of rational responsibility. Not only is it reasonable to believe that miracles can and do happen, it is unreasonable to think they cannot and do not occur.” - Ralph McInerny

“Claims for the occurrence of miraculous events will have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. There can be no general theory to cover the character of unique events, but the refusal to contemplate the possibility of revelatory disclosures of an unprecedented kind would be an unacceptable limitation, imposed arbitrarily on the horizons of religious thought.” - John Polkinghorne

I have never encountered any evidence that would make me presume else wise.

[Kingpoleon]

I have never encountered any evidence that would make me presume else wise

And so you take all accounts of miracles when someone tells you of them as false, as you require your own first person experience to admit not even the actuality of something, but even the potentiality of it?

[It Was Predetermined That You Would Read This Username]

I have never encountered any evidence that would make me presume else wise

And so you take all accounts of miracles when someone tells you of them as false, as you require your own first person experience to admit not even the actuality of something, but even the potentiality of it?

Christians don't become Christians because they see miracles happen. They see miracles happen because they are Christians.

People see what they want to see in the world. Honestly, the fact that there have supposedly been 100,000,000 "miracles"-- none of which have been verified in any scientifically documented or objective fashion-- speaks more to the willingness of Christians to see miracles in their toast than it does to the veracity of those claims.

[Kingpoleon]

Christians don't become Christians because they see miracles happen. They see miracles happen because they are Christians.

People see what they want to see in the world. Honestly, the fact that there have supposedly been 100,000,000 "miracles"-- none of which have been verified in any scientifically documented or objective fashion-- speaks more to the willingness of Christians to see miracles in their toast than it does to the veracity of those claims.

The University of Virginia has an entire department which has verified a number of a specific type. Bruce Greyson, Peter Fenwick, Raymond Moody, and Edward F. Kelly have all published on this. Jacalyn Duffin undertook another specific group of miracles, medical miracles, and published an academic book on the subject. Jeffrey Rediger, a professor at Harvard Medical School, JUST published a book on medical miracles as well. It is one thing to argue against them - it is another to make assertions in the face of contrary evidence.

[It Was Predetermined That You Would Read This Username]

Christians don't become Christians because they see miracles happen. They see miracles happen because they are Christians.

People see what they want to see in the world. Honestly, the fact that there have supposedly been 100,000,000 "miracles"-- none of which have been verified in any scientifically documented or objective fashion-- speaks more to the willingness of Christians to see miracles in their toast than it does to the veracity of those claims.

The University of Virginia has an entire department which has verified a number of a specific type. Bruce Greyson, Peter Fenwick, Raymond Moody, and Edward F. Kelly have all published on this. Jacalyn Duffin undertook another specific group of miracles, medical miracles, and published an academic book on the subject. Jeffrey Rediger, a professor at Harvard Medical School, JUST published a book on medical miracles as well. It is one thing to argue against them - it is another to make assertions in the face of contrary evidence.

Half of these people are neuroscientists who examine why the human mind tricks itself into believing it has had a religious experience. The other half are fringe nuts like Ray Moody who are widely ignored and/or condemned by the serious scientific community. Why do you insist on trying to affirm your faith through widely discredited pseudoscience? Just say that you believe without evidence; don't try to convince yourself that you somehow arrived at these beliefs through honest and unbiased inquisitiveness.

[RFayette]

I have never encountered any evidence that would make me presume else wise

And so you take all accounts of miracles when someone tells you of them as false, as you require your own first person experience to admit not even the actuality of something, but even the potentiality of it?

Christians don't become Christians because they see miracles happen. They see miracles happen because they are Christians.

In fact, Craig Keener has pointed out that miracles are the most common among the mission field, areas with limited prior exposure to Christianity.   Sources like the China Christian Council (see 14:20) shows a large percent of Christian converts (up to 90 pct in rural areas) in China cite a healed illness as a reason for conversion*to Christianity*.  So it is clear that God, among other means, provides clear testimony to the gospel to people who have never been exposed to the faith before through miraculous healing.    

A few more points from 17:00:  Similarly, in an area in Suriname, a non-Christian man had his arm (which had been paralyzed all his life) instantly shot up, and that led to a "people movement" in Nickerie, Suriname, where tens of thousands of people converted in the area which previously only had a few hundred Christians.  We also see evidence from Yale historian Ramsay MacMullen that the leading cause of conversion to Christianity in the 3rd-4th century was healing and exorcisms, and scholar JP Moreland estimates that up to 70% of the growth in Evangelicalism worldwide over the past few decades has been linked to signs, wonders, and miraculous healing.

Throughout history, God has spoken clearly and forcefully to people throughout many nations with these glorious acts of power, expanding the kingdom of God throughout the world.   

[Kingpoleon]

Half of these people are neuroscientists who examine why the human mind tricks itself into believing it has had a religious experience. The other half are fringe nuts like Ray Moody who are widely ignored and/or condemned by the serious scientific community. Why do you insist on trying to affirm your faith through widely discredited pseudoscience? Just say that you believe without evidence; don't try to convince yourself that you somehow arrived at these beliefs through honest and unbiased inquisitiveness.

This is broadly inaccurate.

Peter Fenwick, Sam Parnia, Edward F. Kelly, and Bruce Greyson have all said they believe the evidence points to an afterlife. Not a single one of them is a neuroscientist who says the evidence is not there. They are not fringe scientific nuts - they are commonly cited academics. There are a number of problems with materialism, both philosophically/logically and scientifically/evidentiary. Werner Heisenberg, probably the most brilliant physicist in history, put it succinctly: “The ontology of materialism rested upon the illusion that the kind of existence, the direct 'actuality' of the world around us, can be extrapolated into the atomic range. This extrapolation, however, is impossible! ... Atoms are not things."

[It Was Predetermined That You Would Read This Username]

I have never encountered any evidence that would make me presume else wise

And so you take all accounts of miracles when someone tells you of them as false, as you require your own first person experience to admit not even the actuality of something, but even the potentiality of it?

Christians don't become Christians because they see miracles happen. They see miracles happen because they are Christians.

In fact, Craig Keener has pointed out that miracles are the most common among the mission field, areas with limited prior exposure to Christianity.   Sources like the China Christian Council (see 14:20) shows a large percent of Christian converts (up to 90 pct in rural areas) in China cite a healed illness as a reason for conversion*to Christianity*.  So it is clear that God, among other means, provides clear testimony to the gospel to people who have never been exposed to the faith before through miraculous healing.    

A few more points from 17:00:  Similarly, in an area in Suriname, a non-Christian man had his arm (which had been paralyzed all his life) instantly shot up, and that led to a "people movement" in Nickerie, Suriname, where tens of thousands of people converted in the area which previously only had a few hundred Christians.  We also see evidence from Yale historian Ramsay MacMullen that the leading cause of conversion to Christianity in the 3rd-4th century was healing and exorcisms, and scholar JP Moreland estimates that up to 70% of the growth in Evangelicalism worldwide over the past few decades has been linked to signs, wonders, and miraculous healing.

Throughout history, God has spoken clearly and forcefully to people throughout many nations with these glorious acts of power, expanding the kingdom of God throughout the world.   

I do not trust Craig Keener's word on the efficacy of Christian miracles any more than I trust the word of David Miscavige on the efficacy of Dianetics. If there is ever a consensus in the scientific community that miracles are real-- say, on the same level as global warming-- then I'll get back to you. But cult members can't be trusted to represent their cult using facts.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Yes, I was prayed over and miraculously healed of a condition that is incurable according to medical science.

[Kingpoleon]

I do not trust Craig Keener's word on the efficacy of Christian miracles any more than I trust the word of David Miscavige on the efficacy of Dianetics. If there is ever a consensus in the scientific community that miracles are real-- say, on the same level as global warming-- then I'll get back to you. But cult members can't be trusted to represent their cult using facts.

This is absurd. There is no “scientific consensus” on the existence of Abraham Lincoln, or on the existence of Columbus, or on the existence of matter itself. The idea that a very narrow field such as science holds all the answers to everything and will eventually abolish the humanities is absurd. Now, it is true that 35-40% of scientists are Christians who believe in the Resurrection of Jesus, and this view is becoming more common among scientists. (This is one of two subgroups in America where religiosity is increasing.) What percent have to be Christians for you to affirm that miracles and science are not in conflict?

[Liberal Hack]

Science and medicine are not perfect, headleable illnese may be misdiagnozed and rare mutations may lead to results that are hard for medical science to explain. none of that suggests the existence of a deity and even if it does nothing indicates it would be the religious deity that humanity would be familiar with.