Book Plunge: Can Christians Prove The Resurrection?

[Gary]

No. I am saying you could examine the cures. I am saying that medicine cannot tell you about metaphysical questions. Let's suppose that there is a person who has been blind all their life and then they go to their local church. The church prays over them in the name of Jesus and then as soon as they're done praying, the person's eyes are opened and they can see.

A doctor cannot tell you how it came about necessarily. They could only confirm that yes, he has good vision now and yes, he was blind before. The metaphysical question is out of their reach.

Also, you do not have to be a doctor to know that going from being blind to being able to see is a cure.

If I were to read Keener's two volume work on alleged miracles, and still say that I believe that there are natural explanations to explain the miracle claims, you are simply going to say that I am closed minded. So why should I bother?

[Apologiaphoenix]

Does Keener's book have such a case?

Why don't you find out?

If I could confirm that a person who has been blind since birth (congenital blindness) was immediately able to see after a prayer to Jesus, I would believe in miracles. However, just because someone in the hinterland of China makes this claim, I am not going to accept it as fact. Even if you say a group of doctors in the hinterland of China confirmed the "miracle" I am not going to believe it until I can review all the evidence and interview the patient and witnesses.

Go ahead then. Find out and see.

So do you have a case of someone being cured of congenital blindness by prayer, IN THIS COUNTRY, that I can review?

You know what to do. I'm not doing your homework for you.

[Apologiaphoenix]

If I were to read Keener's two volume work on alleged miracles, and still say that I believe that there are natural explanations to explain the miracle claims, you are simply going to say that I am closed minded. So why should I bother?

No. If you want to, you can tell me why you don't think the miracle claims are valid and then we can discuss said miracle claims. Are all of them valid? Who knows. It's a stretch to think every single person who has ever claimed a miracle though has to be wrong all because of an unbacked presupposition.

[Gary]

No. If you want to, you can tell me why you don't think the miracle claims are valid and then we can discuss said miracle claims. Are all of them valid? Who knows. It's a stretch to think every single person who has ever claimed a miracle though has to be wrong all because of an unbacked presupposition.

If I am not allowed to use the standards of western medicine to evaluate these miracle claims, due to the "metaphysical" nature of these events, exactly how am I going to determine if a miracle happened or if the "cure" can be explained by a natural explanation??

Faith??

[Apologiaphoenix]

If I am not allowed to use the standards of western medicine to evaluate these miracle claims, due to the "metaphysical" nature of these events, exactly how am I going to determine if a miracle happened or if the "cure" can be explained by a natural explanation??

Faith??

You can examine the claims. It's just that medicine only limits itself to material factors. It can't say if an immaterial factor intervened or not. That's not it's place. You could provide any battery of before and after tests to say the person went from having the condition or sickness involved to not having it.

[Gary]

No. If you want to, you can tell me why you don't think the miracle claims are valid and then we can discuss said miracle claims. Are all of them valid? Who knows. It's a stretch to think every single person who has ever claimed a miracle though has to be wrong all because of an unbacked presupposition.

But my point is this: I nor anyone else can PROVE that a miracle did not happen. We can only show that there are alternative explanations. So how is reading Keener's book going to change that? If I say there is an alternative explanation, you are going to say that the existence of a possible natural explanation does not exclude the possibility of a miracle. We will be back to square one.

[Apologiaphoenix]

But my point is this: I nor anyone else can PROVE that a miracle did not happen. We can only show that there are alternative explanations. So how is reading Keener's book going to change that? If I say there is an alternative explanation, you are going to say that the existence of a possible natural explanation does not exclude the possibility of a miracle. We will be back to square one.

Fine. Don't just say there is an alternate explanation. Give what it is. Make a case for it. Show what exactly it is that leads to healings taking place when prayers in the name of Jesus are given.

[Gary]

Fine. Don't just say there is an alternate explanation. Give what it is. Make a case for it. Show what exactly it is that leads to healings taking place when prayers in the name of Jesus are given.

Wait a minute. So if John Doe says that his lung cancer was cured by praying to Jesus, I have to PROVE it was cured by something else??

[Apologiaphoenix]

You don't have to, but unless you can show a better explanation, then I have rational justification for believing that it was the prayer to Jesus.

[Gary]

You don't have to, but unless you can show a better explanation, then I have rational justification for believing that it was the prayer to Jesus.

You have just demonstrated why it is a waste of my time to read your miracle book.

Let's say that Mr. John Doe with lung cancer has been treated with various medical treatments but the most recent CT scan shows that his lung cancer persists. He goes to his church and asks them to pray. The church prays for him for three months. At the end of those three months he has another CT scan. This CT scan shows the cancer is shrinking, and the CT scan 6 months after that shows no sign of cancer. He appears to be cured of lung cancer...or at least in remission.

What is the cause of this man's cure? Could it be that prayer cured him? Yes, we can't rule it out. But it is also possible that the cure is due to the previous medical treatments that are just now having an effect. The other naturalistic explanation is that the man had a rare, spontaneous remission.

How would we know which explanation is the true cause of this man being lung cancer free?

[Apologiaphoenix]

You have just demonstrated why it is a waste of my time to read your miracle book.

Let's say that Mr. John Doe with lung cancer has been treated with various medical treatments but the most recent CT scan shows that his lung cancer persists. He goes to his church and asks them to pray. The church prays for him for three months. At the end of those three months he has another CT scan. This CT scan shows the cancer is shrinking, and the CT scan 6 months after that shows no sign of cancer. He appears to be cured of lung cancer...or at least in remission.

What is the cause of this man's cure? Could it be that prayer cured him? Yes, we can't rule it out. But it is also possible that the cure is due to the previous medical treatments that are just now having an effect. The other naturalistic explanation is that the man had a rare, spontaneous remission.

How would we know which explanation is the true cause of this man being lung cancer free?

Dude. Many of these events take places where there isn't the best of medical care. Now if there is other treatment involved, that can be documented as well, but without that, some things happen that are inexplicable.

The time you've spent complaining about the books, you could have read them already.

[Gary]

Dude. Many of these events take places where there isn't the best of medical care. Now if there is other treatment involved, that can be documented as well, but without that, some things happen that are inexplicable.

The time you've spent complaining about the books, you could have read them already.

You want me to PROVE an alternative explanation. That is ridiculous. All I can do is demonstrate that there are alternative, possible, explanations.

[Adrift]

Are there any cases of amputees or decapitees being healed in Keener's book, Nick? If not, it is a waste of any educated person's time to read thousands of anecdotal cases about "miracles" that can be ascribed to natural causes. I am a doctor, Nick. I know the criteria in the medical field for believing in a "cure". You don't.

This coming from a guy who supports (and I imagine practices) woo like acupuncture, herbal therapy, and other holistic nonsense.

[Gary]

This coming from a guy who supports (and I imagine practices) woo like acupuncture, herbal therapy, and other holistic nonsense.

I have explained the false dichotomy that you are trying but failing to establish as true. The fact that you persist in pushing this accusation against me is nothing but slander.

[Adrift]

I have explained the false dichotomy that you are trying but failing to establish as true. The fact that you persist in pushing this accusation against me is nothing but slander.

It isn't slander. You've admitted to believing in the efficacy of quack alternative "medicine". What's that saying? By definition alternative medicine has either not been proved to work or been proved not to work. What do you call alternative medicine that's been proved to work? Medicine.