Hume makes no a priori case or argues in a circle against miracles but instead portrays how people fool themselves into believing in them.
People want to believe. People discount any facts against their beliefs.
Was there any follow-up of the alleged healing? Did the person actually have that purported malady? Did trickery ensue?
Healers can find people with enough sight to see their fingers so that they claim to heal the m but put forth their fingers right in front of the blind who see what they already could see, and thus no miracle happened!
Some people think that healers have healed them but die shortly thereafter.
Did the person have that particular malady? Was she misdiagnosed or misunderstood the doctor?
The Vatican contemns itself with its fraudulent claims of miracles ,based on the uncredible reports of its faith-based experts! Skeptics ever find no such miracleS. Mother Dearest Teresa does no miracles but the credulous Vatican prattles otherwise. And she was in reality a vile person as Christopher Hitchens proclaims!
What is the reason for Marian apparitions that the Vatican at times so relishes? None mean anything! Imaginative children made up the Fatima and the Medjugorje apparitions.
Why would the Deity make such when He did nothing for the victims of the Holocaust? What a perverted contrast!
Why the need for the bleeding statues? Again, we skeptics find natural causes.
The Vatican accedes to evolution but still pushes for ensoulment? When did that miracle happened in our evolution/ In the homo habilis?
That is obscurantism for which it ever loves.
Never do lovers of miracles give evidence for even just one miracle! They ever give misinterpretations as is their wont in presenting evidence anyway!
No comments:
Post a Comment