Dear all, I am currently writing a book (in Spanish) about philosophy, science and religion. One of the chapters deals with the supernatural and the proofs for it. Although I have found a number of kind of documented miracles to talk about, I am still looking for a well documented case of miracles, possessions and supernatural events. When I said "well documented" means not just the "somebody told me" or "it is said". For instance, in the case of a possession I am looking to have incontrovertibly proofs of levitation etc... The major argument is that, although religious people often talk about supernatural events, to date none has been able to be undoubtedly shown as true supernatural event. Living in the XXI century, the era of information, globalization and scientific advances I think we should already be able to achieve this task. Your suggestions are welcome.
My first stop, Jose, would be here: http://en.lourdes-france.org/deepen/cures-and-miracles/the-international-medical-committee
Some of the Eucharistic miracles are difficult to explain and have good scientific support. There was a Polish miracle recently in a place called Sokolka and the famous Argentinian one which was investigated by a lapsed Catholic Australian TV journalist who was certain enough to return to the Church and spend his time giving talks about his experience. (And don't omit the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima for which there are contemporary press reports and photos and the 'Wizard Clip' incidents, see http://motheofgod.com/threads/holy-soul-speaks-to-lutherans.5743/#post-55563)
This one has an amazing and scientifically tested miracle in Bolivia. What might be worth checking out is the lab results from the Holy Oil exuded from Our Lady of Soufanieh icons in Damascus. It is 100% pure olive oil which is impossible to manufacture by any earthly process. http://www.soufanieh.com/MEDICAL/HUILE/19900416.fra.eng.chromatography.oil.htm There is a lab report somewhere on the internet. Holy fire at Christs tomb. You might get some food for thought in this video also Fr. Zlatko Sudac's stigmata on his forehead has been proven to be genuine in a hospital in Rome, results are available. There is so much how can anyone not believe!!
Thanks for your examples. I knew all of them and, unfortunately, they cannot be considered authentic miracles. Dr. Castañón is not a scientist, he is only a clinical psychologist without any peer review publications. He is promoting also the fraud of Catalina Rivas (and her statues emanating blood ans oil) and only dedicated to give talks ad publishing books about his pseudscientist analysis. I say pseudoscientis because he did not follow any rigorous scientific protocol controlled by peers. The Dr. involved in the identification of the sample was Dr. Zugibe, I know him, personally because of my interactions in the group of scientist involved in the analysis of the Turin Shroud. Zugibe is a retired Dr. dedicated to the study of the crucifixion and the Turin Shroud and he does not represent an independent, impartial lab. Apart from that , there is no way to guarantee the custody chain of the samples. Regarding the Holy Fire it is also not a miraculous event, it was even declared fraud by some Pope in the middle ages. The video presented showing miraculous balls of fire running among the people can be confronted with another one in youtube mor recent where one can clearly see that people are running from the center to the sides carrying some candles even before the Patriarch is coming out of the Holy Sepulchre. There is nothing miraculous about it. The only serious miracles presented are the ones approved by the Catholic Church for the declaration of sanctity or the scientific commission in Lourdes. I went through the last "miracles" presented for the last canonizations and through all "miracles" of Lourdes and that science cannot explain a reversion of a tumor or the cure of an aneurysm does not mean that this reversions and cures are not possible (there are plenty reported in the scientific literature). For me it is conclusive that not miracles are reported involving the cure of a Down syndrome, for instance, or the regeneration of a limb. There is only one famous case in Spain (Calanda) to which Messori dedicated an entire book. But was it the only miracle of this kind ever? How sure can we be about the sources? Only one miracle of this kind? Very suspicious. I am still looking for the definitive one without controversy.
What the scientific commission in Lourdes says is that no "scientific explanation" can be found for the cure. But that does not mean there is none.
Hi Jose. You probably already know This article. If not, enjoy. Good luck in your (re)search. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v322/n6077/pdf/322321a0.pdf http://scienceandbelief.org/2011/03/26/science-miracles/
I have to reply to this comment. I have no doubts that the Holy Fire miracle which occurs each year in Jerusalem is totally genuine. Like most Catholics, I had never heard of it until the internet 'opened up' information in so many areas. Jose has obviously seen the video which needs explaining but his explanation does not fit the circumstances. On his wider request, I have always felt that God almost makes a point of NOT providing scientific proofs of His existence. Of course the world is full of proofs of His existence but I think God avoids providing the kind of proof that compels belief. Just a personal view!
Don't get me wrong here but do you actually believe in miracles yourself, Jose? The miracle that will satisfy the atheist hasn't yet occurred or there would be no (or very few) atheists. Your search might be pointless if even the medical 'miracles' recorded at Lourdes don't 'measure up'. I recall reading about an Italian woman without eye pupils who was healed after Padre Pio prayed for her. I don't know whether the lady is still alive but this ought to be persuasive to anyone if proof is available. For some other inexplicable (apparently) miracles associated with Padre Pio, see: http://catholicism.org/challenge-padre-pio.html
For me just because science or doctors can or can't explain why someone's health turned for the better does not negate the existence of God. I have heard many many many doctors say that there comes a point when they are fighting that no matter what they do it is out if their hands at that point. They either lose the patient or some miraculous change occurs. For me, the only miracles I need to believe in all occur in Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. In reality I believe in most of the others that occurred after 33 AD as well. We have an awful lot of saints and thus many miracles that had to occur for their canonization. Can science prove God or is the point that they cannot because you have to drop your rational thought at some point in your process and have faith! [26] And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them. Jesus cometh, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said: Peace be to you. [27] Then he saith to Thomas: Put in thy finger hither, and see my hands; and bring hither thy hand, and put it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing. [28] Thomas answered, and said to him: My Lord, and my God. [29] Jesus saith to him: Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed. [30] Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book.
Jose might be interested in this video, titled "Are miracles scientific?": It is a talk given by a very interesting man named Dr. Jonathan Sarfati. I recommend anyone to listen to this scientist who clearly has a phenomenal intellect yet is a strong conventional Christian.
Interesting project, Jose (I am actually involved in writing something similar myself). One of the main issues here is philosophical - what constitutes 'proof', and for who? That's a basic question of epistemology, and the whole problem is that the definitions of 'proof' vary from community to community. My premise is that in our daily lives our understanding of what is 'real' is not really based on deductive proof (of the 2+2=4 variety), nor on inductive method, but rather on 'inference to a best explanation', or 'abduction' as C.S. Peirce called it. As epistemologists such as Alvin Plantinga have shown, there are many categories of things we take for granted,such as the existence of the past, or countries where we have never been, for which there is technically no cast-iron proof (someone could have injected us with hallucinogenic drugs while we were asleep, the evidence can be faked, the eyewitnesses are lying, the scientific equipment has been tampered with ...). For me, the miraculous fits in this category; although that may not satisfy the hardcore sceptics, that is largely because they are using a standard of proof which is both debatable philosophically and also far from the way in which we make actual judgments in real-world situations. Ultimately it all comes down to one's presuppositions; the 'miracle of the sun' in Fatima is a good case in point - for me and most of those on this forum the objective evidence for its authenticity is simply overwhelming, but Richard Dawkins insists on trying to deconstruct it in his 'Unweaving the Rainbow' by simply appealing to David Hume's (philosophically very dubious) theory about miracles. Hume's argument is basically that miracles don't happen because they're impossible!! I exaggerate a little, but not much - try reading Keith Ward's refutation of Hume and you'll see how fallacious his thesis is, because he builds the conclusion into the premise, which isn't legitimate philosophically. But apart from appealing to Hume, Dawkins simply has NO convincing arguments against Fatima, which speaks for itself.
Matthew 12:39 The Sign of Jonah 38Then some of the scribes and Pharisees said to Him, "Teacher, we want to see a sign from You." 39But He answered and said to them, "An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet; 40for just as JONAH WAS THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS IN THE BELLY OF THE SEA MONSTER, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.… https://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/VOYLOUR.HTM
Dear Peter and all, Yes, if God exists, why doubt about miracles? No, I am not with Hume at this point. But what I am interested in is showing that a claimed miracle is.... really a miracle. It's not a philosophical question. It's a scientific question. If a possessed person levitates, this will not be a philosophical question. We only need to show that the claims are true without any doubt. This is what I am interested about. At the moment I could not find any eventthat could undoubtedly be presented as miraculous. It is no about believing or not if the holy Fire is miraculous. It is about showing it.
Doesn't the church have a doctor on hand at every exorcism? I am sure they have the proof but do not release it for whatever reason. I suspect Jose if the proof was out there in the world publicly we would already know about it. Good luck in your research though!
Atheists nearly need to be present in the lab to in anyway warm to the miraculous. I don't agree on your refuting my examples, I have researched them and others including our lady of Guadeloupe, I admit mainly using the internet but also books and some correspondence. I was satisfied but I am not an atheist. Did you look up results for Oil from Icons in Damascus, which is very topical now and will be even more in time? http://www.soufanieh.com/ENGLISH/eehuile.htm#A N A L Y S I S O F T H E O I L You see 100% pure: http://www.soufanieh.com/MEDICAL/HUILE/19840907.GER.GER.OIL.RESULTS.jpg You know oil has been videoed to exude from the ICON's which have been surrounded in glass. Did you look for these test results? http://www.stjeromecroatian.org/eng/frsudac.html
Dear Indy, I do not think you understood my point. I am not against the possibility of the existence of miracles. What I am saying is that it is not easy to show that a miracle is a real one. In this screen I might miss some "real" ones but I cannot accept as a proven miracle a claim or a couple of photos. Did I explain it now properly? I only need one where all circumstances like chain of custody etc... could be followed up. It is just like a case in court. The evidences have to be proven true and I cannot admit only "it looks like", "it was said" , "I saw something" etc... Yes, this is a scientific way to proceed and who said that to know if a claim is true or not we cannot proceed scientifically? This is not, as some people say, to put God under the microscope, it is about approaching correctly the claims. For instance, the problem with the stigmata. I say problem because to date for nobody was it possible to study these phenomena properly. Properly means the following. Imagine that a seer or visionary or mystic claim to receive stigmas every year at Good Friday. One could investigate these claims scientifically by: 1. Organizing a group of INDEPENDENT medical doctors to attend the event and supervise the protocol 2. Bring an INDEPENDENT official notary to witness the protocol 3. Assuring the recording of the event by some prestigious mass media company. 4. Impair the possibility of self inflicting wounds by sealing the wrists and feet. 5. etc... etc... This is how to approach such claims. Without this kind of protocols one cannot be sure about anything. A famous example is the case of Theresa Neumann that I already commented here. The doctors were never allowed by the close relatives to examine this person CONTINUOUSLY during the events. They NEVER saw actual bleeding but when they were allowed to examine the blood it was already there. I am very familiar with this case as one of the people involved in the investigations was a professor in Regensburg who saw the case as fraudulent. I hope I made clear my views.
