# "Scientific" vetting of miracles is incompatible with Christian faith **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 8, 2013, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511 "2013-01-08T18:04:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8491ac/32.png) [@Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fake_Tales_of_San_Francisco)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/21 "2013-01-08T20:28:51Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Completely? There’s no concept of salvation or grace or active faith in ancient religions. Hinduism is an ancient religion, and the concepts of salvation and grace are present. Isis was the god of salvation, wasn’t she? Friend of slaves and sinners. Sound familiar? > [@](#): > > The essence of Christianity isn’t Genesis, it’s the teachings of and faith in Christ. Scientific understanding doesn’t factor in to that. So you’re basically ignoring the old testament? Scientific understanding does factor into the historicity of Jesus. If he never lived and taught then his teachings were made up. If his teachings were made up, then what use is faith other than as a puerile justification to believe in anything that takes your fancy? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/22 "2013-01-08T20:29:54Z")
> [@Strinka](#): > > The idea that religion can’t be proven is a recent one. Remember Doubting Thomas? Jesus’s response to his skepticism was to show him his wounds. In other words, have him observe and gather evidence for his resurrection. Agreed. > [@Strinka](#): > > And generally speaking, almost all of religion’s claims are observable and have real effects on the universe. Did Jesus turn water into wine? Did he walk on water? Those things can be observed. The supernatural is not by definition outside the purview of science. Science can study anything that can be observed. If it can be observed, it’s not supernatural. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/23 "2013-01-08T20:32:18Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > I don’t know about universally agreed upon, not much is universally agreed upon. > > [Merriam-Webster](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supernatural) > > As “the observable universe” is what science describes, the supernatural is everything else. It may or may not exist, but it’s beyond science. Give us an example of something that is supernatural that is beyond the pervue of science. ---
**Author:** ![Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8491ac/32.png) [@Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fake_Tales_of_San_Francisco)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/24 "2013-01-08T20:32:42Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > If it can be observed, it’s not supernatural. So I guess that’s a nail in the coffin for any argument that claims the Bible is true because it is a series of witness accounts. When Jesus walked on water, that was not a miracle because people saw him do it? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/25 "2013-01-08T20:37:39Z")
IF mankind actually tried to observe this idea that the supernatural was beyond the pervue of science, then we never would have advanced. At one time the whole world was supernatural to us. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/26 "2013-01-08T20:38:46Z")
> [@Fake Tales of San Francisco](#): > > Hinduism is an ancient religion, and the concepts of salvation and grace are present. Isis was the god of salvation, wasn’t she? Friend of slaves and sinners. Sound familiar? Is it considered an ancient religion? It’s old, but not THAT old. > [@Fake Tales of San Francisco](#): > > So you’re basically ignoring the old testament? It’s not the emphasis of Christianity, no. > [@Fake Tales of San Francisco](#): > > Scientific understanding does factor into the historicity of Jesus. If he never lived and taught then his teachings were made up. If his teachings were made up, then what use is faith other than as a puerile justification to believe in anything that takes your fancy? Minus the “peurile”, that’s what faith is. It’s up the individual to decide if anything has sufficient merit to be worthy of faith. > [@Czarcasm](#): > > Give us an example of something that is supernatural that is beyond the pervue of science. Divine grace. > [@Fake Tales of San Francisco](#): > > So I guess that’s a nail in the coffin for any argument that claims the Bible is true because it is a series of witness accounts. When Jesus walked on water, that was not a miracle because people saw him do it? That’s not an arguement I’d make, no. ---
**Author:** ![Strinka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/strinka/32/512_2.png) [@Strinka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Strinka)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/27 "2013-01-08T20:39:57Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > > [@Strinka](#): > > > > The idea that religion can’t be proven is a recent one. Remember Doubting Thomas? Jesus’s response to his skepticism was to show him his wounds. In other words, have him observe and gather evidence for his resurrection. > > Agreed. But that contradicts your point that Christianity is based on faith. If faith is so important to Christianity, why is it that every important Christian figure had to be shown evidence? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/28 "2013-01-08T20:42:26Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > IF mankind actually tried to observe this idea that the supernatural was beyond the pervue of science, then we never would have advanced. At one time the whole world was supernatural to us. That could be the case. I’m a big fan of science, myself. I am unable to generate the faith required to call myself a Christian, but many are. And it needn’t be justified with scientific claims. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/29 "2013-01-08T20:43:48Z")
> [@Strinka](#): > > But that contradicts your point that Christianity is based on faith. If faith is so important to Christianity, why is it that every important Christian figure had to be shown evidence? Such evidence is one cause that can give rise to faith, but it is not the only one. ---
**Author:** ![Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8491ac/32.png) [@Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fake_Tales_of_San_Francisco)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/30 "2013-01-08T20:49:41Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Is it considered an ancient religion? It’s old, but not THAT old. Its a concept in Indian religions dating back well before Christ. Isis is an Egyptian goddess by the way. She was the friend of sinners thousands of years before Jesus tried to claim he was. Christianity brought nothing new to the table, apart from a whole new mythology. > [@Human\_Action](#): > > **Only** actual, sincere, spiritual conviction can convince someone to have faith in Christ. > [@Human\_Action](#): > > Such evidence is one cause that can give rise to faith, but it is not the **only** one. These two statements contradict one another. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/31 "2013-01-08T20:49:43Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Christianity isn’t “wrong” in opposition to science, which is “right”, because they are tools to achieve wholly separate ends: divine grace; and understanding of the natural world. They needn’t, and shouldn’t, be in opposition. Christianity is _wrong_ because it’s irrational, illogical and factually incorrect. It cannot be true; it doesn’t hold together logically. And until relatively recently, Christianity was an explanation for the natural world; it just turned out to be a false one. And the one and only real purpose of Christianity is to convince as many people as possible to say “I’m Christian”. Everything else about it is subordinate to that and subject to change as tactical needs dictate. > [@Human\_Action](#): > > The supernatural is beyond the purview of science _by definition._ Nonsense. That’s just something the defenders of the supernatural say to try to defend their fantasies. If the supernatural existed science would study it just like everything else. ---
**Author:** ![Strinka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/strinka/32/512_2.png) [@Strinka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Strinka)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/32 "2013-01-08T20:51:46Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > > [@Czarcasm](#): > > > > Give us an example of something that is supernatural that is beyond the pervue of science. > > Divine grace. I mostly disagree with this. Divine grace doesn’t have any observable effects to us in our current state, but supposedly it will after we die. Assuming we can observe anything after death, we would be able to observe heaven/hell. > [@Human\_Action](#): > > Such evidence is one cause that can give rise to faith, but it is not the only one. I don’t know what you mean by this. Was it un-Christian for Doubting Thomas to doubt? His situation doesn’t seem any different to me than the situation of people trying to prove miracles like Alexandrina Balasar. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/33 "2013-01-08T20:57:45Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Divine grace. I know what grace is, and it certainly isn’t supernatural. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/34 "2013-01-08T20:58:39Z")
> [@Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](#): > > Its a concept in Indian religions dating back well before Christ. > > Isis is an Egyptian goddess by the way. She was the friend of sinners thousands of years before Jesus tried to claim he was. Christianity brought nothing new to the table, apart from a whole new mythology. I’m not up on Isis, I’ll have to do some reading. > [@Fake Tales of San Francisco](#): > > These two statements contradict one another. You’re right, poor phrasing on my part. Faith is the only way, and it may or may not be accompanied by evidence. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Christianity is _wrong_ because it’s irrational, illogical and factually incorrect. It cannot be true; it doesn’t hold together logically. Irrational, yes. Illogical, to some degree. Factually incorrect? Unknowable, see below. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > And until relatively recently, Christianity was an explanation for the natural world; it just turned out to be a false one. It was used for that purpose, but wrongly so. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > And the one and only real purpose of Christianity is to convince as many people as possible to say “I’m Christian”. Everything else about it is subordinate to that and subject to change as tactical needs dictate. The purpose is clear: spiritual salvation. Anything run by humans, however, is flawed and easily corrupted. > [@Der Trihs](#): > > Nonsense. That’s just something the defenders of the supernatural say to try to defend their fantasies. If the supernatural existed science would study it just like everything else. Not all claims are falsifiable, are they? If something cannot be tested by the scientific method, is there another term you’d prefer? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/35 "2013-01-08T21:01:08Z")
> [@Strinka](#): > > I mostly disagree with this. Divine grace doesn’t have any observable effects to us in our current state, but supposedly it will after we die. Assuming we can observe anything after death, we would be able to observe heaven/hell. And if such observation is not possible? > [@Strinka](#): > > I don’t know what you mean by this. > > Was it un-Christian for Doubting Thomas to doubt? His situation doesn’t seem any different to me than the situation of people trying to prove miracles like Alexandrina Balasar. Yes, it was. > [@Czarcasm](#): > > I know what grace is, and it certainly isn’t supernatural. What is it? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/36 "2013-01-08T21:14:09Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Irrational, yes. Illogical, to some degree. Factually incorrect? Unknowable, see below. Not unknowable, Christianity makes false factual claims all the time. > [@Human\_Action](#): > > The purpose is clear: spiritual salvation. No; the purpose like any religion is to convince people to follow it. Talk about “spiritual salvation” is simply one of its many tactics used to persuade people. If that stops working it’ll be discarded and something else will replace it. > [@Human\_Action](#): > > Not all claims are falsifiable, are they? If something cannot be tested by the scientific method, is there another term you’d prefer? I’m not sure what you are getting at, but religious/supernatural claims aren’t unfalsifiable because they are profound or any such nonsense; they are unfalsifiable because they are carefully tailored that way to avoid outright disproof by science. Blatant frauds. > [@Human\_Action](#): > > And if such observation is not possible? Then we don’t even know it exists and the issue doesn’t arise. ---
**Author:** ![Strinka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/strinka/32/512_2.png) [@Strinka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Strinka)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/37 "2013-01-08T21:17:03Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > And if such observation is not possible? Then it would meet your definition of supernatural. Though, I would question it’s relevance to Christian theology. It seems like needing divine grace to get into heaven is an important point in Christianity. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/38 "2013-01-08T21:21:44Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Is it considered an ancient religion? It’s old, but not THAT old. It’s that old. Partly for that reason it’s much less standardized than newer religions, but its roots are thousands of years older than the other major religions. Getting back to the main question, what you’re saying is logical. But I think it overlooks the way people behave. People have trouble keeping aspects of their beliefs separate and they want to know how things work. You can say science and faith have nothing to do with each other, but (as other posters noted) that hasn’t been true at all historically and I think from a psychological perspective people want the world to obey one set of rules. They can accept a certain amount of mystery, but they don’t want a world that’s half science and half religion. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/39 "2013-01-08T21:33:50Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > What is it? If “grace” falls under your definition of “supernatural”, then so do a number of other emotions..and your definition is totally useless as it pertains to this conversation. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511/40 "2013-01-08T21:35:14Z")
Supernatural-that which sleeps in the shadows before light is brought forth. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-vetting-of-miracles-is-incompatible-with-christian-faith/646511.md?page=3)