The Instigator
Pro (for)
3 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

scientificially inexplicable things occur that appear supernatural, but not to atheists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/21/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 802 times Debate No: 32728
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




scientifically inexplicable, apparently supernatural things occur, but not to atheists. these are apparent miracles.

please show something that happened to an atheist, that would have been called an apparent miracle had it happened to a religous person, because of its scientifically inexplicable nature.
no semantics pleas

what are thought of as miraculous events are heavily documented and readily available. there are tons of examples for theists, in previous debates i shown them. most credible people dont dispute hat things appear to be miracles, just that they claim there's alterative explanations. im not going to do a bunch of work to find them when it's readily available. . someone can see with no retinas even though this seems scientifically impossible etc, just to use an example. here are some documented miacles, and things that are inexplicable.

here is a list of incurable illnesses that have been cured, and medically documented...

lourdes is a religious place where many healings are said to occur. they have an organization set up to examine them (similar to the congregation for saints that the catholic church uses, but said to be even more rigorous)

here is a list of incurable diseases, that were cured

their criteria...
For a cure to be recognised as medically inexplicable, certain facts require to be established:
The original diagnosis must be verified and confirmed beyond doubt
The diagnosis must be regarded as "incurable" with current means (although ongoing treatments do not disqualify the cure)
The cure must happen in association with a visit to Lourdes, typically while in Lourdes or in the vicinity of the shrine itself (although drinking or bathing in the water are not required)
The cure must be immediate (rapid resolution of symptoms and signs of the illness)
The cure must be complete (with no residual impairment or deficit)
The cure must be permanent (with no recurrence)

The steps to verify the claims...
Approximately 35 claims per year are brought to the attention of the Lourdes Medical Bureau. Most of these are dismissed quickly. Three to five each year are investigated more thoroughly, by drawing up a Medical Bureau, comprising any doctors who were present in Lourdes at the time the apparent cure took place (this is the rationale for all members to notify the bureau of their visits to Lourdes).
The Medical Bureau investigates the claim, by examining the patient, the casenotes, and any test results (which can include biopsies, X-rays, CT scans, blood test results, and so on).
If this conference decides that further investigation is warranted, the case is referred to the International Lourdes Medical Committee (abbreviated in French to CMIL), which is an international panel of about twenty experts in various medical disciplines and of different religious beliefs. CMIL meets annually. A full investigation requires that one of its members investigates every detail of the case in question, and immerses him/herself in the literature around that condition to ensure that up-to-date academic knowledge is applied to the decision. This investigator may also consult with other colleagues about the case.
This information is presented at a CMIL meeting. Also present at the meeting are the head of the Lourdes Medical Bureau and the Bishop of Tarbes and Lourdes (currently this is Nicolas Brouwet). The cured subject is not normally present.

medically documented of incurable illessness..... what more would you require of me? that is a sincere question, not rhetorical
i will keep looking for studies and such, and may redebate you. if i deem it necesssay, if you do too good of a job as devil's advocate.
at a certain point, it is more the profound skeptisicms of the person, who needs to see it with their own eyes. than it is the lack of documentation etc.

the common objection of atheists and skeptics is that things just happen to occur by probability, that a genetic deviance, or random chance etc has caused it to happen to them. (that's how evolusion occurs, someone with a genetic deviance getting their genes prominent in the population)

but I don't see these things happening to atheists.
I see plenty of evidence from chrisitans and to a lesser extent other religious folks. but I don't see it from atheists etc, why is that? they might claim that it's just not as newsworthy or interpreted that way given the lack of religious context etc.
but you'd think there's at least be noteworthy evidence, or something, at least, that shows it happens to atheists etc

also, even if i acknowledged that they may occur, it would be extremely very small percentage wise.
as of now i'd be happy with just couple or a few examples.

ive shown some examples happening to theists, it shouldnt be hard to find some happening to atheists.


Introduction: Supernatural- things that can not be explained. That is a great definition for that word because a miracle is a recovery or a "blessing" that cannot be explained by science. Many Christians and other theists believe that a miracle can only come from god himself, but a miracle is simply a recovery that is unexplained. Now it's no mystery that unexplained things happen because they do but in no way of any means do they have to come from god. I personally believe that SOME miracles come from god but not everything unexplained comes from god.

Yes of course if a Christian thought a miracle happened he would document it to a church or a hospital but if An atheist experienced a miracle he wouldn't think it came from god he would think that he was just Lucky or that there was no miracle at all.

Now I'm not going too say all those reported miracles are false but am going to stay neutral and say that no one knows for sure if that was an incurable disease. Unexplained events are as just as likely to happen to an atheist. Things in science don't always add up, like during natural selection there are mutations that occur some people believe this is caused by god, but mutations have been found in both atheists and theists.

It is implied in your argument that atheists are the only group of people that don't get supernatural miracles happen to them. But what about all the other groups of people that don't believe in the Christian god? (Assuming the debates on the Christian god) just as many Islamists, Hindus, Taoists, etc have had reported supernatural miracles and unexplained blessings. So why do only atheists not receive miracles.
I would like to thank my opponent for the debate and am looking forward to the next two rounds. :)
Debate Round No. 1


you basically just asserted that atheists won't acknowledge that it's a miracle or something notable so it's never made a point of. you'd think you'd be able to find something that appeared supernatural, though. given I can find examples from theists etc. yet this simple request was not honored.
if miracles do happen to nonchristian faiths, it's probably because they have faith to begin with, and are in good faith. upon my search, though, they don't appear to happen nearly as much as they do for Christians, search around and find some... they are not very credible even when they are found. but yea, faith is the common denominator.

you agree miracles almost surely occur, so this is more just you playing devils advocate for atheists. still, you should be able to find the evidence requested, and haven't done it.


wolfman4711 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2




wolfman4711 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by wolfman4711 3 years ago
Man, I might lose the easiest debate in history
Posted by MilesandMilesofMiles 3 years ago
Why would you make a copy of a debate you're already losing?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: lol