What would it take for Me to Believe in a Miracle?

Here is the kind of miracle claim that doctors would want to see to even consider a supernatural cause:

Ms. Jane Doe, a 58 year old white female in Los Angeles, was sent for a chest x-ray in February of 2012, by her family doctor, due to a chronic cough of two months. The x-ray demonstrated an opaque mass in the lower lobe of her left lung. One week later she had a CT scan of the lungs at Cedar Sinai Hospital which again showed the left lower lobe mass, with characteristics very suspicious for cancer. She had a subsequent biopsy of the mass which revealed an aggressive form of lung cancer. A week later she had a PET scan at Cedar Sinai which showed probable metastasis in her spine, liver, and brain. By this time the cough was worse, she was fatigued, jaundiced, and was beginning to have pain in the areas of her spine with metastatic spread of her cancer.

Ms. Doe was evaluated by two lung specialists (pulmonologists), a medical oncologist, and a radiation oncologist. All agreed she was terminal but offered her palliative radiation and chemotherapy. However, Ms. Doe refused any medical treatment.

That next Sunday, she went to her church and asked her pastor and the elders to lay their hands on her and pray that if it was God’s will that he would heal her cancer. They did, and the cough, jaundice, fatigue, and pain slowly resolved over the next two weeks. A month later she went to her doctor and asked for another CT scan. The doctor ordered the CT scan and was shocked when he viewed the study, again taken at Cedar Sinai Hospital, which was completely clear. The oncologist (cancer specialist) whom Ms. Doe had seen only six weeks earlier (and declined his treatment), reviewed the CT scan and was also shocked. He ordered another PET scan at Cedar Sinai and it was completely negative for any sign of cancer. The imaging studies and the case were presented to the monthly Cedar Sinai tumor board and the imaging studies were presented at the monthly Cedar Sinai radiology tumor board; all specialists agreed that the patient was completely cured.

Outside cancer experts were asked to confirm the findings. After a thorough review, the outside experts concurred that the cancer was completely gone.

Dear Christians: Please show me a case like this and I just might believe.


23 thoughts on “What would it take for Me to Believe in a Miracle?

  1. Vasu Bhardwaj
    (((Vasu claimed that on May 25, 2002, electro-phoresis and bone marrow tests were conducted and he was astonished when both reports came out to be negative. “I am leading a normal life now and am not taking even a single medicine. This is because of faith healing. I did not know anything about Gurbani but had faith in God. After every two months, I go to the Golden Temple”, said Vasu.

    He was invited to attend the camp by Dr Balwant, local organiser. Thousands of patients from Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and other states are participating in the camp to get themselves treated for fatal diseases like cancer and tuberculosis and neurological problems. )))

    Young Malaysian Conquers Mt Kinabalu Just One Month After Completing Cancer Treatment

    Letter to Baba Kyrillos.

    Calvinism fail


  2. My Christian friends on Theology Web believe that miracles do occur among non-Christians, however, not due to their gods, but due to the benevolence of the Christian God or due to the powers of Satan.


  3. I don't have a strong opinion about supernatural miracles _personally_, except that I think that they probably happen, more likely than not. Probably surprising healings do occur throughout the world in different religions and prayer helps with this even if the person doesn't know he/she is prayed for. This is just my idea. But it being paranormal, even if you can prove a real miracle, I don't know how you can totally prove as pure logic that the prayer caused it as pure logic bc correlation is not causation. But I think correlation is evidence towards causation.

    I think that our current understanding of science is probably too rigid, stoic, materialistic, lifeless. But despite IMO the paranormal being real, I don't know how you could prove it.


  4. Folks, if miracle healings are real, let's see the Youtube cell phone videos of shriveled up hands, arms, and legs instantly being healed after a prayer to Jesus; let's see thyroid goiters melt away right before our eyes after a prayer to Jesus; let's see dead people brought back from the dead immediately after a prayer to Jesus. These are the kinds of miracle claims that Keener and Nick say are happening by the “hundreds of millions”.

    Thousands if not millions of cell phone pictures and videos are taken every day! If “hundreds of millions” of people are seeing miracles, there should be at least ONE video that shows an instantaneous cure of a visible condition, whose cure cannot be faked or imagined.

    If believers in miracle healings such as Keener are correct, LET'S SEE THE VIDEOS! Let's see just ONE video of an instantaneous healing that cannot be faked or imagined.


  5. Gary . . .

    You have neither “proved” science, nor “disproven” Christian theology. Your perpetual, ongoing attempt to do so prove you to be anything but a student of reason, and science is merely a tool to get from where we are in knowledge today to where we will be tomorrow.

    Of course, I told you all of this two and one-half years ago, when I told you that the Resurrection, et. al., of the Christian Faith is an “Article of Faith.” As such, you cannot disprove it, as little as I (or anyone) can prove it.

    That you permitted your “guys” to take you from the Faith to a denial of Faith is a matter of your own manner of thinking, the switch not having solved your problem whatsoever. You have denied categorically the Faith, all the while no more able to prove or disprove your theory(s).

    It is, to coin a phrase, simply what YOU believe. Every bit a product of faith as is Christianity. Be that as it may, I am sure you will continue to flail away demanding proof until the day you die. So be it. Your choice.

    As my is my choice, which you cannot disprove, despite all the tremendous weapons science has accumulated. The simple fact remains that the Resurrection, and Christian theology, cannot be proven nor disproven. The very answer you demand of others is the weak link in your very chain of reasoning.

    Several articles for your perusal and consideration, and that of any of your readers.



    Pax – pb


  6. For once, Rev. Baxter, I completely agree with you.

    I cannot disprove your FAITH. I cannot disprove the Resurrection. I cannot disprove the supernatural (miracle) claims of the Bible and Christianity. In fact, I cannot disprove the existence of ANY supernatural claim or entity.

    Faith and the supernatural cannot be proven or disproven. Both are metaphysical concepts and metaphysical concepts cannot be examined using the standards of evidence used by modern science and the scientific method—the current standard for evaluating reality in our society.

    Your FAITH is safe, Rev. B.

    However, once proponents of Faith and the Supernatural (miracles, gods, demons, etc.) attempt to claim that they have GOOD EVIDENCE for their supernatural claims, that is when I can confidently step forward and proclaim: You are full of BS!

    There is no good evidence for any supernatural claim, especially the Resurrection. The only evidence Christians can claim for this alleged first century event is hearsay and generalizations/assumptions about the beliefs and habits of an ancient people living twenty centuries ago.

    Therefore, my REASON is safe.

    Very safe.


  7. They already did, ie those who say Jesus' story was only intended as metaphor.

    This view has a big problem though. It misunderstands the intention and claims of the religion, just as Calvin misunderstood whether the religion was trying to claim that there was something supernatural about the bread's composition.

    To use an extreme example, it would be like claiming that the Romans, ancient Indus, Buddhists, Egyptians and Chinese did not intend their stories about the supernatural literally, but only as metaphors.

    Such a proposition might be appealing to those who disbelieve the stories but like the stories, but it hides the intended meaning of those stories.

    When Quakers propose that Jesus and the Bible writers did not intend to create a new ritual of communion, it looks to me like they are forcing Christianity to meet their own anti-ritualistic expectations and preferences, rather than actually understanding and judging about Christianity on its own terms.


  8. I'm skeptical about the main miracles, but believe in God and think Jesus qualifies as having been pushed by God to be the Christ, since he caused knowledge of the Abrahamic God to go around the world with acceptance.

    modern era critical scholars have a habit of forcing the “original” Christian story to meet their expectations, so that if they don't believe in some things like the miracles, they wrongly imagine that this means that Jesus didn't originally teach these things.


  9. Gary, this stuff is nuts.

    The logic is not there. Calvin's answer, to paraphrase, is that since he believes in the Eucharist ritual as being supernatural and Jesus' body being in heaven, therefore he is not being naturalistic.

    This seems to be the standard Calvinist answer.

    In the same passage Calvin will assert that he is not subjecting Jesus' body to natural laws like Lutherans claim he is, and then in the same paragraph assert that Jesus' body must stay in its “proper dimensions”.

    He makes this same internal contradiction twice in two passages in the Institutions.

    Check out my conversations with Taylor and Dan


    They cannot handle seeing the naturalistic skepticism in Calvin's views about older Catholic/Lutheran practices.


  10. Sorry, R, but I am no longer interested in Calvin-bashing. I would suggest looking at your own irrational beliefs before poking your finger in the eyes of any more Calvinists.


  11. Why is this poking in the eyes, rather than bringing out truth?
    If Calvinists have achieved a positive, rational position on issues, is it not better to bring this out and propose and advocate progress?


  12. I guess I just see it very differently from you. I see you as more superstitious than the Reformed. It is you who I believe should move in their direction, not trying to bring them towards yours. From my perspective, you are attempting to pull them towards the Darkness of superstitious ignorance, which I abhor.


  13. I am the kind of person who is skeptical about Christmas, but I like it.

    Calvinists teach that it's immortal to celebrate Christmas, and if you are skeptical about what it commemorates then you are unsaved and a bad person, and if you live in a Calvinist theocracy you get banished, and if you keep coming back, then you know what's next.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s