God or pilot?

Most of you should know about the plane that was "landed" in the Hudson river. There was a bird strike event where a flock of birds caned both engines, then the pilot made the decision to land the plane on the river. Everyone survived thanks to the pilot and there has been much said about his actions, but there has also been an annoying undercurrent of talk about "miracles" and "God". Case in point, check out the title of this BBC Piece

Pilot hailed for 'Hudson miracle'

Source: BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7832439.stm

A miracle is an event that so surpasses natural powers as to be an act of the supernatural. What part of this surpasses all known natural laws? It was spectacular but perfectly possible to do. Also, ascribing this to god is to spit in the face of the pilot who did the work, the rescue workers and the collective human sophistication that creates such stable flying machines.

It's the same thing where people say "the miracle of birth". I don’t think anything qualifies more as a natural law.. Than reproduction. And to label such things as miracles is to take serious liberties with the English language.

Posted under: Skepticism, Religion
Posted on: Friday, January 16, 2009 1:40 PM
« If you’re going to protest then don’t misspell your sign | Home | I get email: 'Real Injustices'??? »
Share this post: email it, bookmark It, digg It, kick It

Comments

  1. Posted by: Mith on 1/17/2009 5:41 AM
    Gravatar
    To answer your question, a miracle of God does not require something that is in nature, supernatural. Often, people do tend to put that requirement on it, but to just phrase Bruce Almighty:

    "Parting your soup is not a miracle Bruce, it's a magic trick. A single mom who's working two jobs, and still finds time to take her son to soccer practice, that's a miracle. A teenager who says "no" to drugs and "yes" to an education, that's a miracle. People want me to do everything for them. What they don't realize is *they* have the power. You want to see a miracle, son? Be the miracle."

    A work of God doesn't always have to be supernatural and by definition, we are literally God's creation. So say that it was a miracle isn't exactly a spit on the face of the guy who saved their necks per say, since in accorance to the wisdom above, God doesn't need to literally snap His fingers and make things happen by magic. We as His children, so it stands to reason that we have inherited that same ability to do good in the world and perform miracles (miracle is also defined as a wonder or a work of God). Now, we can't do it by magic or through some sort of super power as God would, but I always find myself dipping into the philisophical question; doesn't that make it all the miraculous?

    Anyway, I hope that answers your question; a miracle isn't always considered a supernatural event nor does God have to literally perform such an act; they can be the miracle to paraphrase Bruce Almighty. And I must say, with what the Catholic Church is calling miracles these days...toast with the face of Christ's biological mother on it. I must say, that I think Bruce Almighty makes a more compelling argument as to what a miracle is then people impressed by faces on toast.

    Still, good to raise these questions. Thinking starts with questions.=)
  2. Posted by: ArgusEyes on 1/17/2009 8:16 AM
    Gravatar
    I'm sorry but apparently thinking stops with religion.

    If you're going to go by that Bruce Almighty (which I did like) definition then the work miracle has no meaning any more. How many kids have said "no" to drugs and "yes" to education? I did, and I presume you did as well, certainly more than not. Now, if a miracle is an everyday event that is quite probable, then it falls into the terms that have been plundered just like the feminists did with the word "rape" and collectivists have done with "bigot", "fascist" and "racist".

    If everyone is special then no one is (to quote an even better film), and if a mundane everyday act can be a miracle then there are no miracles.
  3. Posted by: Mith on 1/17/2009 3:09 PM
    Gravatar
    In a way, it has been plundered and it comes from the latching onto things that prove God exists (or appear to is rather more accurate). Take the grilled cheese sandwich for example; that is not a miracle. Even if God literally came down and drew on it with His finger, that is not a miracle. It would be amazing, but the real miracle is when good is done. Now, that may include supernatural displays, but it certainly doesn't limit it to acts that prove God exists. It is again, as you said, a plundered term that has been pushed more into a supernatural field by the church in order to keep the suckers faithful (I refer to suckers as those who only believe because of 'miracles').

    And to address your point about the mundanity of miracles, it falls into everything that God (and by extension we)does. It isn't special or awesome at every moment, but it doesn't have to be. Think of it like a magician's trick. Some are more fantastic than the others, but at the end of the day, they are all still tricks. Same thing with God; the magician who decides to put his carrer aside and debunk frauds swindling people of their money is just as good as God parting a sea. In fact, if Jesus's own words are to be believed, then the former is in fact act is greater than the later, since said magician (James Randi) had much less to work with (a reference to the poor woman giving all she had).
  4. Posted by: ArgusEyes on 1/18/2009 6:57 AM
    Gravatar
    Mith: What is your authority to make these numerous claims about what a miracle is?
  5. Posted by: Mith on 1/18/2009 11:05 PM
    Gravatar
    Authority? Do you mean what knowledge I command of the subject or my authority in a position of a religious institution/group?
  6. Posted by: ArgusEyes on 1/19/2009 2:16 AM
    Gravatar
    Anything. What gives you the authority to completely redefine an English word, to make the claims about what a miracle actually is?
  7. Posted by: Mith on 1/19/2009 3:04 AM
    Gravatar
    I'm afraid I was a bit confused. So, I've checked over several definitions of the term miracle. My first source was wikipedia, which undoubtably supports the assertion of a supernatural event. Of course, since it's wikipedia, I'm not going to use that as my soul source. Dictionary.com describes it as an act of God or a marvel of sorts. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary describes it as either a miracle of God or an unusual event. Finally, the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus, and Encyclopedia describes seemingly just about all of them:

    Mir-a-cle

    1. An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God: "Miracles are spontaneous, they cannot be summoned, but come of themselves" Katherine Anne Porter.
    2. One that excites admiring awe. See Synonyms at wonder.
    3. A miracle play.

    Miracle

    1. an event contrary to the laws of nature and attributed to a supernatural cause
    2. any amazing and fortunate event: it's a miracle that no-one was killed in the accident
    3. a marvellous example of something: a miracle of organization [Latin mirari to wonder at]


    In both cases from that source, number one indicates a supernatural event that cannot be explained via the known laws of nature. It seems that I may have been mistaken. I may have to look more into the subject, but if that is the case (and it seems likely), I think I had the diservice of being taught incorrectly as to the word (perhaps it might have been my pastor growing up, he had a very loose term for what a miracle is apparently, but I suppose I should have double checked before correcting someone). What I am getting from these sources is that miracle is closely attributed to divine intervention.

    In which case, they would be incorrect. It is not a sign of divine intervention. I can per say how one might see it being one, but there is no actual reason to believe it is so. Now, if the pilot was dead and it had a soft landing, that I could possibly accept.

    I stand corrected.
  8. Posted by: ArgusEyes on 1/20/2009 12:49 AM
    Gravatar
    Good man.

Post your comment




(this will save your form settings for the next time you comment)

Please add 7 and 6 and type the answer here:

The umbrella in particular is remembered as the symbol of the nineteenth century’s disturbing obsession with individualism. In Bellamy’s utopia, umbrellas have been replaced with retractable canopies so that everyone is protected from the rain equally.
“In the nineteenth century,” explains a character, “when it rained, the people of Boston put up three hundred thousand umbrellas over as many heads, and in the twentieth century they put up one umbrella over all the heads.”