Argument Topic: Credibility

There is no credible evidence to support the existence of supernatural healings. Any apparent healing that occurs through supernatural means can be explained by other factors, such as the placebo effect, misdiagnosis, coincidence, or fraud.

@MayCaesar ;Could you please finally answer my questions?

Guess what. Of coarse he’s not going to answer your questions. And also guess what. That news paper clip is a made up fraud. And guess what else. All the sites he posted are spams and the doctors don’t exist and the ones that do leed to spoof sites. 

And also guess what. Just sayin is a total fraud troll who goes on other debating sites. 

And also guess what. Just like all the other trolls that have done the same thing here before by repeating over and over and not responding he is a bout to be kicked off . A little birds told me that and I’m giving it a week before that peace of dog mess gets the boot.

MayCaesar said:

just_sayin said:

MayCaesar said:

@just_sayin

I am very confused... Her doctor is telling the story that he did not witness himself, just based on her words - and that is what convinces you that divine intervention took place here, rather than, say, an act of witchhood? Would a witch not conjure a fancy story like this in order to gain acknowledgment of the local church and hide her witchy nature?

If you really just go by her words, then I would like to hear what methodology you use to decide when to treat someone's storytelling as factual and when to not. If I tell you, for instance, of my (real) dream where I found myself in the realm of the Spider Queen Lolth who told me that I must live a fun and exciting life that she can enjoy watching, lest I end up in her horrifying realm under my death - will you conclude that I am the chosen of the evil goddess? Why or why not?

Please answer my actual questions. So far you have not answered a single one, which is quite disappointing. You can post these stories all you want, but if you do not engage in the actual conversation, then you are just wasting your time. I can google these stories myself; right now I am talking to you, and I want to hear your thoughts, not Thomas' or Barbara's thoughts.

May, are you moving the goalposts yet again.  It certainly reads like it.  

No less than 3 of Barbara Cummiskey Snyder's doctors have written either books or case studies on her story.  If you would like to hear her story in her own words here you go (start at 43:45)

https://1c15.co.uk/barbara-snyder-barbara-cummiskey-snyder-healed-from-multiple-sclerosis/

So according to you:

1) Barbara made up her extensive medically documented case of MS and blindness
2) Barbara faked not being able to walk for 7 years and being blind
3) She had an air tube and feeding tube inserted into her body for many years so she could fake a miracle
4) She paid off her doctor's to say she was on her death bed
5) 3 Doctor's with Mayo Clinic credentials lied about her recovery in the books and case studies they wrote
6) Her family lied about her blindness and MS
7) The in-home nurse lied about Barbara's condition

That's a lot of conspiracy theory there.  Her story is backed up by the medical evidence and at least 3 doctor's testimony.  Kinda hard to say that the lady who was on her death bed, and can now walk and isn't blind anymore is the one lying. Since all the medical evidence backs up her story, it seems her account is more likely to be right, than yours.

Now answer my question for a change.  You keep dodging it.  Where is your evidence that someone magically recovers from their deathbed with MS which paralyzes the lungs, and internal organs, regains their lost eyesight, and is able to walk, with no atrophy, after not being able to walk for 7 years?  Her doctors all said it was a miracle.  If you have evidence that it wasn't, then share it.

Here's her story in the Chicago Tribune, Sept 26, 1983

Could you please finally answer my questions? Why should I answer your question "for a change" when I have answered a large number of them and you have not returned the courtesy even once?

I will repeat them for your convenience:

1. "Her doctor is telling the story that he did not witness himself, just based on her words - and that is what convinces you that divine intervention took place here, rather than, say, an act of witchhood? Would a witch not conjure a fancy story like this in order to gain acknowledgment of the local church and hide her witchy nature?"
2. "If I tell you, for instance, of my (real) dream where I found myself in the realm of the Spider Queen Lolth who told me that I must live a fun and exciting life that she can enjoy watching, lest I end up in her horrifying realm under my death - will you conclude that I am the chosen of the evil goddess? Why or why not?"

I have not talked about any "conspiracy theories", I have not made any of the 7 claims you listed, and I have not claimed that "X was not a miracle" about anything you mentioned. Not only do you refuse to answer my simple and direct questions, but you also keep putting words in my mouth and question positions that you attribute to me, yet that I do not hold and have never expressed.

I noticed that you once again failed to answer the question I put before you.  When will you provide the evidence that science can reproduce these miracles.  In this case you will need to immediately restore someone's lungs, intestines, eyesight, and limbs, so they can immediately walk without any atrophy.  Still waiting on that incredible evidence.

1. "Her doctor is telling the story that he did not witness himself, just based on her words - and that is what convinces you that divine intervention took place here, rather than, say, an act of witchhood? Would a witch not conjure a fancy story like this in order to gain acknowledgment of the local church and hide her witchy nature?"

If it bothers you that her doctor is telling her story, then here it is in her own words:

 http://nebula.wsimg.com/26f08202c2c1c87f2521b6bf967dcdaf?AccessKeyId=B72A5E64E6835B2F4367&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 pages 62-64.

I believe her story is credible because her doctor's validate her medical condition before and after her miracle.  There are at least 4 doctor's on record:

Dr. Harold Adolph - her surgeon

Dr Thomas Marshall - internal organ doctor

Dr. Donal Edwards 

Dr Scott Kolbaba

This is from Thomas Marshall's account immediately after the miracle:

"The next day was a Monday, and Barb called our office for an appointment. My nurse didn’t know what to say when she called. But the greatest surprise was when I saw her in the hallway of our office, walking toward me. I thought I was seeing an apparition! Here was my patient, who was not expected to live another week, totally cured.

I stopped all of her medication and took out her bladder catheter, but she wasn’t quite ready to have the tracheostomy tube removed until another visit. No one had ever seen anything like this before. That afternoon, we sent Barb for a chest X-ray. Her lungs were now perfectly normal, with the collapsed lung totally expanded with no infiltrate or other abnormality that had existed before.

I have never witnessed anything like this before or since and considered it a rare privilege to observe the Hand of God performing a true miracle. Barb has gone on to live a normal life in every way. She subsequently married a minister and feels her calling in life is to serve others, which is what she did after her life was miraculously preserved by her Creator.]"

All four doctor's have Mayo Clinic experience.  That's not too shabby.  Does your witchdoctor have Mayo Clinic experience and 4 award winning doctor's to back up her claims?  Now if you are calling her story a fake, you would have to believe that Cummiskey is lying, her 30 plus doctors were lying, her live in nursing assistant was lying, the Chicago Tribune was lying, ABC's That's Incredible show producers were lying, her medical records were altered, her family was lying, her church was lying, and numerous others were lying.  It seems much more likely that they all are telling the truth, and that you are the one mistaken.

2. "If I tell you, for instance, of my (real) dream where I found myself in the realm of the Spider Queen Lolth who told me that I must live a fun and exciting life that she can enjoy watching, lest I end up in her horrifying realm under my death - will you conclude that I am the chosen of the evil goddess? Why or why not?"

After your Spider Queen dream where you able to walk for the first time in 7 years without atrophy?  Or did you suddenly see when you had been blind for years?  Cause that would really help your claim.  And that is what happened to Cummiskey.  Does your Spider Queen have 17 years of medical records to verify her story?  Barbara Cummiskey does.  Does your Spider Queen have staffs at 3 different hospitals that corroborate her story?  Barbara Cummiskey has several Mayo Clinic doctor's who vouch for her account.  Cummiskey's claim is backed up by her doctor's, her medical records, and the testimony of numerous people who know her.  Does your Spider Queen have that kind of evidence to support your claim that you are her chosen?

As I see it Barbara Cummiskey's claim has several things going for it that your spider queen dream doesn't

1) Before hearing God she could not see, could not walk, was on a breathing tube, and food catheter.  After hearing God she could walk, could see, could breath, and her intestines worked and her MS was gone.  

2) Her story is supported by extensive medical records and the testimony of several credible doctors, all of which claim there is no medical explanation for her recovery.

Now, produce your evidence that Cummiskey's miracle can be reproduced by natural means.  I'm still waiting.

@JulesKorngold @just_sayin @MayCaeser ;There is no credible evidence to support the existence of supernatural healings. Any apparent healing that occurs through supernatural means can be explained by other factors, such as the placebo effect, misdiagnosis, coincidence, or fraud.

Thank you for that. I checked the sites and doctors names that this lying nit posted and they are all frauds or spams. One link to the doctor site captures your details and sends heaps of worthless spams and tries to phish your details, other sites are bloked and the others are all biased editorials put out by extreme religious scammers. This lying nit has totally no scrubbles and will keep on pumping out his rubbish and offending the intelligence and decency of people who are genuinely ill.

Argument Topic: @Barnadot admits defeat

Barnardot said:

@JulesKorngold @just_sayin @MayCaeser ;There is no credible evidence to support the existence of supernatural healings. Any apparent healing that occurs through supernatural means can be explained by other factors, such as the placebo effect, misdiagnosis, coincidence, or fraud.

Thank you for that. I checked the sites and doctors names that this lying nit posted and they are all frauds or spams. One link to the doctor site captures your details and sends heaps of worthless spams and tries to phish your details, other sites are bloked and the others are all biased editorials put out by extreme religious scammers. This lying nit has totally no scrubbles and will keep on pumping out his rubbish and offending the intelligence and decency of people who are genuinely ill.

Thank you for admitting that you lost and that I have proved that prayer works.  That is in essence what you did when you knowingly lied and said my sources were "frauds or spams".  it is obvious that you have no valid argument.  Your actions are tantamount to an unconditional surrender.

Anyone following along and unsure of whom to believe, you can either look at the links I provided or do a quick Google search for 'Barbara Cummiskey' for yourself.  

I've mentioned the book Miracles Today by Craig Keener.  Here he is at Biola University discussing Barbara Cummiskey's miracle:



You can read the account from his book in this PDF sample.  pages 6-10 (corresponding to the preface).

https://www.pcabookstore.com/samples/15426.pdf

An excerpt from those pages:

The next day Barbara visited her doctor’s office. Dr. Marshall recounts his feelings when, in the hallway of his medical office, he first saw Barbara walking toward him. “I thought I was seeing an apparition! Here was my patient, who was not expected to live another week, totally cured.” 

 Over the next three and a half hours, she saw virtually every doctor in the office. Dr. Marshall reports that none of his colleagues “had ever seen anything like this before.” X-rays showed that even her collapsed lung was no longer collapsed.6 He removed all the tubes that could be removed without surgery. Barbara reports his verdict that day: “I’ll be the first to tell you: You’re completely healed. I can also tell you that this is medically impossible.” Dr. Adolph remarks that “her breathing was normal. The diaphragms were functioning normally.”7 He soon reconnected her bowel, which was now functional; her only health problem involved some complications from this new operation. That week, WMBI broadcast her testimony. Eventually, the Chicago Tribune, some television stations, and many magazines and books carried her story. Dr. Marshall told Barbara, “You are now free to go out and live your life.” And Barbara has—now for roughly four decades with no recurrence of MS.8 Dr. Marshall deems it his “rare privilege to observe the Hand of God performing a true miracle.”9 Dr. Adolph notes that Barbara eventually studied surgical technology at the hospital “and even assisted me on several simpler operations. Both Barbara and I knew who had healed her.”10

You can see former investigative journalist and author of the Case for Miracles, Lee Strobel, interview Barbara Cummiskey at 40:40 of this video:



Her surgeon, Dr Harold P Adolph tells Barbara Cummiskey's story in his book: 

Today's Decisions Tomorrow's Destiny

When you opponent has to blatantly lie about you and your sources you know you have completely and utterly proved your point.  I accept your surrender. 

just_sayin said:

I noticed that you once again failed to answer the question I put before you.  When will you provide the evidence that science can reproduce these miracles.  In this case you will need to immediately restore someone's lungs, intestines, eyesight, and limbs, so they can immediately walk without any atrophy.  Still waiting on that incredible evidence.

1. "Her doctor is telling the story that he did not witness himself, just based on her words - and that is what convinces you that divine intervention took place here, rather than, say, an act of witchhood? Would a witch not conjure a fancy story like this in order to gain acknowledgment of the local church and hide her witchy nature?"

If it bothers you that her doctor is telling her story, then here it is in her own words:

 http://nebula.wsimg.com/26f08202c2c1c87f2521b6bf967dcdaf?AccessKeyId=B72A5E64E6835B2F4367&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 pages 62-64.

I believe her story is credible because her doctor's validate her medical condition before and after her miracle.  There are at least 4 doctor's on record:

Dr. Harold Adolph - her surgeon

Dr Thomas Marshall - internal organ doctor

Dr. Donal Edwards 

Dr Scott Kolbaba

This is from Thomas Marshall's account immediately after the miracle:

"The next day was a Monday, and Barb called our office for an appointment. My nurse didn’t know what to say when she called. But the greatest surprise was when I saw her in the hallway of our office, walking toward me. I thought I was seeing an apparition! Here was my patient, who was not expected to live another week, totally cured.

I stopped all of her medication and took out her bladder catheter, but she wasn’t quite ready to have the tracheostomy tube removed until another visit. No one had ever seen anything like this before. That afternoon, we sent Barb for a chest X-ray. Her lungs were now perfectly normal, with the collapsed lung totally expanded with no infiltrate or other abnormality that had existed before.

I have never witnessed anything like this before or since and considered it a rare privilege to observe the Hand of God performing a true miracle. Barb has gone on to live a normal life in every way. She subsequently married a minister and feels her calling in life is to serve others, which is what she did after her life was miraculously preserved by her Creator.]"

All four doctor's have Mayo Clinic experience.  That's not too shabby.  Does your witchdoctor have Mayo Clinic experience and 4 award winning doctor's to back up her claims?  Now if you are calling her story a fake, you would have to believe that Cummiskey is lying, her 30 plus doctors were lying, her live in nursing assistant was lying, the Chicago Tribune was lying, ABC's That's Incredible show producers were lying, her medical records were altered, her family was lying, her church was lying, and numerous others were lying.  It seems much more likely that they all are telling the truth, and that you are the one mistaken.

I do not know about the witchdoctor's experience, but I would be curious to hear what experience Barbara's doctor has that allows him to testify to truthfulness of events that he was not a witness of and that, by their very nature, only Barbara herself could have witnessed. It appears to me that we are dealing here with a set of disjointed accounts, some of which are verifiable, and others are not - and there is no coherent story that can be formed from the former alone.

Barbara's doctor certainly is a good source of any information on her medical condition. Is he a good source on the communication with god she claims to have experienced in her head? If so, I would like to hear why. If not, then his words on that account can be dismissed for the purposes of this discussion - although it is worth adding that the fact that he is willing to say those words which he knows very well cannot be verified makes me seriously question his medical integrity, which, in turn, casts doubts on his claims about her medical condition as well.  Much like if I was cheating on my wife, she would be right to suspect me of telling untruths even when talking about the field of expertise I have an official accreditation in.

To your last point, in order to question the divine intervention experience described above, I do not at all need to hold any of the beliefs you listed. Since, by its nature, this experience was only available to her alone, she is the only one who can testify to its truthfulness, and anyone else who makes any claims on this is fantasizing. There is no need for any global conspiracy for this to be the case: all it takes is a few people getting overexcited and making claims outside of their domain of knowledge. Humans tend to get carried away like this when it is psychologically or socially convenient.

I will have to repeat my question once again since you have failed to address it for the N-th time. I will concretize it: when it comes to experiences that, by their very nature, cannot be verified by anyone other than the person having them - how do you decide whether the claims about them are to be accepted or not? When someone claims that they have been kidnapped by aliens and released later and adds that the aliens are advanced enough to erase any evidence of these events - how do you decide whether to take the person's word or not? This is what I am really interested in discussing. Particular events you have referenced are not as interesting as more foundational epistemological questions.

just_sayin said:

After your Spider Queen dream where you able to walk for the first time in 7 years without atrophy?  Or did you suddenly see when you had been blind for years?  Cause that would really help your claim.  And that is what happened to Cummiskey.  Does your Spider Queen have 17 years of medical records to verify her story?  Barbara Cummiskey does.  Does your Spider Queen have staffs at 3 different hospitals that corroborate her story?  Barbara Cummiskey has several Mayo Clinic doctor's who vouch for her account.  Cummiskey's claim is backed up by her doctor's, her medical records, and the testimony of numerous people who know her.  Does your Spider Queen have that kind of evidence to support your claim that you are her chosen?

As I see it Barbara Cummiskey's claim has several things going for it that your spider queen dream doesn't

1) Before hearing God she could not see, could not walk, was on a breathing tube, and food catheter.  After hearing God she could walk, could see, could breath, and her intestines worked and her MS was gone.  

2) Her story is supported by extensive medical records and the testimony of several credible doctors, all of which claim there is no medical explanation for her recovery.

Now, produce your evidence that Cummiskey's miracle can be reproduced by natural means.  I'm still waiting.

From what I can remember, I drank a lot the night before having that dream, yet next morning I woke up without any hangover whatsoever, in a blissful mood, motivated to work on my social skills. My then-roommates can vouch for both the evening and the morning experience as I discussed it with them. So am I the chosen one? And if not, then why? What would it take for you to accept me as the chosen one? If it was found that 0.01% of my DNA is that of a tarantula, would this convince you?

MayCaesar said:

just_sayin said:

I noticed that you once again failed to answer the question I put before you.  When will you provide the evidence that science can reproduce these miracles.  In this case you will need to immediately restore someone's lungs, intestines, eyesight, and limbs, so they can immediately walk without any atrophy.  Still waiting on that incredible evidence.

1. "Her doctor is telling the story that he did not witness himself, just based on her words - and that is what convinces you that divine intervention took place here, rather than, say, an act of witchhood? Would a witch not conjure a fancy story like this in order to gain acknowledgment of the local church and hide her witchy nature?"

If it bothers you that her doctor is telling her story, then here it is in her own words:

 http://nebula.wsimg.com/26f08202c2c1c87f2521b6bf967dcdaf?AccessKeyId=B72A5E64E6835B2F4367&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 pages 62-64.

I believe her story is credible because her doctor's validate her medical condition before and after her miracle.  There are at least 4 doctor's on record:

Dr. Harold Adolph - her surgeon

Dr Thomas Marshall - internal organ doctor

Dr. Donal Edwards 

Dr Scott Kolbaba

This is from Thomas Marshall's account immediately after the miracle:

"The next day was a Monday, and Barb called our office for an appointment. My nurse didn’t know what to say when she called. But the greatest surprise was when I saw her in the hallway of our office, walking toward me. I thought I was seeing an apparition! Here was my patient, who was not expected to live another week, totally cured.

I stopped all of her medication and took out her bladder catheter, but she wasn’t quite ready to have the tracheostomy tube removed until another visit. No one had ever seen anything like this before. That afternoon, we sent Barb for a chest X-ray. Her lungs were now perfectly normal, with the collapsed lung totally expanded with no infiltrate or other abnormality that had existed before.

I have never witnessed anything like this before or since and considered it a rare privilege to observe the Hand of God performing a true miracle. Barb has gone on to live a normal life in every way. She subsequently married a minister and feels her calling in life is to serve others, which is what she did after her life was miraculously preserved by her Creator.]"

All four doctor's have Mayo Clinic experience.  That's not too shabby.  Does your witchdoctor have Mayo Clinic experience and 4 award winning doctor's to back up her claims?  Now if you are calling her story a fake, you would have to believe that Cummiskey is lying, her 30 plus doctors were lying, her live in nursing assistant was lying, the Chicago Tribune was lying, ABC's That's Incredible show producers were lying, her medical records were altered, her family was lying, her church was lying, and numerous others were lying.  It seems much more likely that they all are telling the truth, and that you are the one mistaken.

I do not know about the witchdoctor's experience, but I would be curious to hear what experience Barbara's doctor has that allows him to testify to truthfulness of events that he was not a witness of and that, by their very nature, only Barbara herself could have witnessed. It appears to me that we are dealing here with a set of disjointed accounts, some of which are verifiable, and others are not - and there is no coherent story that can be formed from the former alone.

Barbara's doctor certainly is a good source of any information on her medical condition. Is he a good source on the communication with god she claims to have experienced in her head? If so, I would like to hear why. If not, then his words on that account can be dismissed for the purposes of this discussion - although it is worth adding that the fact that he is willing to say those words which he knows very well cannot be verified makes me seriously question his medical integrity, which, in turn, casts doubts on his claims about her medical condition as well.  Much like if I was cheating on my wife, she would be right to suspect me of telling untruths even when talking about the field of expertise I have an official accreditation in.

To your last point, in order to question the divine intervention experience described above, I do not at all need to hold any of the beliefs you listed. Since, by its nature, this experience was only available to her alone, she is the only one who can testify to its truthfulness, and anyone else who makes any claims on this is fantasizing. There is no need for any global conspiracy for this to be the case: all it takes is a few people getting overexcited and making claims outside of their domain of knowledge. Humans tend to get carried away like this when it is psychologically or socially convenient.

I will have to repeat my question once again since you have failed to address it for the N-th time. I will concretize it: when it comes to experiences that, by their very nature, cannot be verified by anyone other than the person having them - how do you decide whether the claims about them are to be accepted or not? When someone claims that they have been kidnapped by aliens and released later and adds that the aliens are advanced enough to erase any evidence of these events - how do you decide whether to take the person's word or not? This is what I am really interested in discussing. Particular events you have referenced are not as interesting as more foundational epistemological questions.

just_sayin said:

After your Spider Queen dream where you able to walk for the first time in 7 years without atrophy?  Or did you suddenly see when you had been blind for years?  Cause that would really help your claim.  And that is what happened to Cummiskey.  Does your Spider Queen have 17 years of medical records to verify her story?  Barbara Cummiskey does.  Does your Spider Queen have staffs at 3 different hospitals that corroborate her story?  Barbara Cummiskey has several Mayo Clinic doctor's who vouch for her account.  Cummiskey's claim is backed up by her doctor's, her medical records, and the testimony of numerous people who know her.  Does your Spider Queen have that kind of evidence to support your claim that you are her chosen?

As I see it Barbara Cummiskey's claim has several things going for it that your spider queen dream doesn't

1) Before hearing God she could not see, could not walk, was on a breathing tube, and food catheter.  After hearing God she could walk, could see, could breath, and her intestines worked and her MS was gone.  

2) Her story is supported by extensive medical records and the testimony of several credible doctors, all of which claim there is no medical explanation for her recovery.

Now, produce your evidence that Cummiskey's miracle can be reproduced by natural means.  I'm still waiting.

From what I can remember, I drank a lot the night before having that dream, yet next morning I woke up without any hangover whatsoever, in a blissful mood, motivated to work on my social skills. My then-roommates can vouch for both the evening and the morning experience as I discussed it with them. So am I the chosen one? And if not, then why? What would it take for you to accept me as the chosen one? If it was found that 0.01% of my DNA is that of a tarantula, would this convince you?

So the fact that the doctor repeats what Barbara has consistently said is what upsets you??  They are not only providing their medical observations, they told her story in their publications.  This is an incredibly weak argument from you.  You admit the doctor's are good sources for her medical condition, for both pre and post miracle, but after essentially admitting there is a medical miracle, it is Barbara's testimony that God spoke to her to stand up that you doubt.  Now, since the beginning of Barbara retailing her story, she has mentioned that her two friends, Joyce Jugan and Angela Crawford, where in the room with her and that she said ― (Taken from her personal account - http://nebula.wsimg.com/26f08202c2c1c87f2521b6bf967dcdaf?AccessKeyId=B72A5E64E6835B2F4367&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 , pages 62 - 64)

Joyce! Angela!‖ I blurted, ―God just spoke to me. He said to get up and walk. I heard Him.‖ The two women stared at me. ―I know, I know, it‘s weird,‖ I said. ―But God really did speak to me. Please, run and get my family. I want them!‖
They flew out to the hallway, called my sisters and parents and rushed back into the room. I couldn‘t wait any longer. I took the oxygen tube from my throat, removed the brace from my arm and actually jumped out of bed. And there I stood, on two legs that hadn‘t held the weight of my body in over five years. This wasn‘t possible, of course – there were 1,001 medical reasons why this couldn‘t be happening. Yet there I stood, firmly, solidly, feeling tingly all over, as if I had just stepped from an invigorating shower. I could breathe freely. And I could see – I could see me. A whole, healthy me. My hands were normal, not curled to my wrists. The muscles in my arms and legs were filled out and whole. My feet were flat to the ground, like a dancer‘s. And oh, the step I danced as I headed toward the doorway. I met my mother in the hallway. She stopped short and then she lifted the hem of my nightgown. Her eyes widened, her arms flung wide. ―Barbara,‖ she cried. ―You have calves again!‖ Dad was on the wheelchair ramp to the family room. Speechless, he wrapped me in his arms and waltzed me around and around. Then everyone – my parents, Aunt Ruthie, Jan, my teenage sister Amy – applauded wildly while I tried some ballet steps I hadn‘t done in 16 years. Next I walked to the couch, sat down – and stood up again. Down. Up. Down up. Six times in a row. Angela Crawford, an occupational therapist, hardly knew what she was saying: ―B-but, Barb, you can‘t….‖ She took my pulse and exclaimed, ―Barb, you‘ve just wrecked everything I learned in school! You‘re absolutely normal; it‘s really a miracle!‖

So there is the corroborating evidence of Joyce Jugan and Angela Crawford

So, to summarize your argument: you acknowledge there is evidence of a medical miracle, but since God only spoke to Barbara Cummiskey, we should ignore the medical evidence.  What a weak, illogical argument.

just_sayin said:

So the fact that the doctor repeats what Barbara has consistently said is what upsets you??  They are not only providing their medical observations, they told her story in their publications.  This is an incredibly weak argument from you.  You admit the doctor's are good sources for her medical condition, for both pre and post miracle, but after essentially admitting there is a medical miracle, it is Barbara's testimony that God spoke to her to stand up that you doubt.  Now, since the beginning of Barbara retailing her story, she has mentioned that her two friends, Joyce Jugan and Angela Crawford, where in the room with her and that she said ― (Taken from her personal account - http://nebula.wsimg.com/26f08202c2c1c87f2521b6bf967dcdaf?AccessKeyId=B72A5E64E6835B2F4367&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 , pages 62 - 64)

I am not sure if anything upsets me here; probably not this, at least. I am merely pointing out that no one but Barbara can have witnessed the described events, so anyone who is not Barbara, regardless of their qualifications, has nothing but her own words to go by. And, once again, I am politely asking you to clarify by which standard you judge whether a person's words not backed up by any external evidence are to be taken as factual statements or not.

just_sayin said:

So there is the corroborating evidence of Joyce Jugan and Angela Crawford

So, to summarize your argument: you acknowledge there is evidence of a medical miracle, but since God only spoke to Barbara Cummiskey, we should ignore the medical evidence.  What a weak, illogical argument.

That is a pretty questionable summary, since none of the two parts of it has been referenced by me at any point. I 1) do not "acknowledge there is evidence of a medical miracle, and 2) do not suggest that "we should ignore the medical evidence". The way you phrased the argument, indeed, makes it weak and illogical. I would suggest, however, that it is equally illogical to claim that I have made this argument when I demonstrably have not.

Could it be that, rather than trying to genuinely understand my argument and have to work on developing a proper response to it, you choose an easier path and continuously attribute indefensible statements to me that I do not subscribe to?

MayCaesar said:

just_sayin said:

So the fact that the doctor repeats what Barbara has consistently said is what upsets you??  They are not only providing their medical observations, they told her story in their publications.  This is an incredibly weak argument from you.  You admit the doctor's are good sources for her medical condition, for both pre and post miracle, but after essentially admitting there is a medical miracle, it is Barbara's testimony that God spoke to her to stand up that you doubt.  Now, since the beginning of Barbara retailing her story, she has mentioned that her two friends, Joyce Jugan and Angela Crawford, where in the room with her and that she said ― (Taken from her personal account - http://nebula.wsimg.com/26f08202c2c1c87f2521b6bf967dcdaf?AccessKeyId=B72A5E64E6835B2F4367&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 , pages 62 - 64)

I am not sure if anything upsets me here; probably not this, at least. I am merely pointing out that no one but Barbara can have witnessed the described events, so anyone who is not Barbara, regardless of their qualifications, has nothing but her own words to go by. And, once again, I am politely asking you to clarify by which standard you judge whether a person's words not backed up by any external evidence are to be taken as factual statements or not.

just_sayin said:

So there is the corroborating evidence of Joyce Jugan and Angela Crawford

So, to summarize your argument: you acknowledge there is evidence of a medical miracle, but since God only spoke to Barbara Cummiskey, we should ignore the medical evidence.  What a weak, illogical argument.

That is a pretty questionable summary, since none of the two parts of it has been referenced by me at any point. I 1) do not "acknowledge there is evidence of a medical miracle, and 2) do not suggest that "we should ignore the medical evidence". The way you phrased the argument, indeed, makes it weak and illogical. I would suggest, however, that it is equally illogical to claim that I have made this argument when I demonstrably have not.

Could it be that, rather than trying to genuinely understand my argument and have to work on developing a proper response to it, you choose an easier path and continuously attribute indefensible statements to me that I do not subscribe to?

You said you don't believe the incident is a medical miracle.  On what basis have you made that determination?  It obviously isn't based on the medical evidence.  

Dr. Harold Adolph, her surgeon,  called it 'a miracle'.  And said "'this was completely unexpected.  There is nothing I can explain on the basis of medicne." (Chicago Tribune Sept 26, 1983)

"At the present time, the patient has no findings of multiple sclerosis, and walks normally, speaks normally, and is very happy as is her family over  the obvious answer to prayer and the good hand of God on her life." -Official medical record DuPaul Hospital signed by Dr Harold Adolph

Dr Donal Edwards, another one of her doctors, said "There is no medical test to explain what has happened." (Chicago Tribune quote)

"The next day was a Monday, and Barb called our office for an appointment. My nurse didn’t know what to say when she called. But the greatest surprise was when I saw her in the hallway of our office, walking toward me. I thought I was seeing an apparition! Here was my patient, who was not expected to live another week, totally cured.

I stopped all of her medication and took out her bladder catheter, but she wasn’t quite ready to have the tracheostomy tube removed until another visit. No one had ever seen anything like this before. That afternoon, we sent Barb for a chest X-ray. Her lungs were now perfectly normal, with the collapsed lung totally expanded with no infiltrate or other abnormality that had existed before.

I have never witnessed anything like this before or since and considered it a rare privilege to observe the Hand of God performing a true miracle. Barb has gone on to live a normal life in every way." - Dr Thomas Marshall, Barbara Cummiskeys internalist, quoted from Physician's Untold Stories Chapter 22 by Scott Kolbaba

It would seem your opinion is in direct conflict with Cummiskey's doctor's assessment.

Your claim that since no one but Cummiskey heard God's voice we can't know if her story is true.  I would say the primary evidence of her miracle is in her medical records before and after her miracle.  They are the undeniable evidence of a miracle. Let's say there was never a voice of God at all; isn't her case still a miracle. 

The fact her friends, family, doctor's, pastor, and several journalists have all repeated the same account seems to suggest it has not changed and is credible.  I don't know how ANY account could be more verifiable.  Just how many doctor's verifying that she had a miracle do you need - there are at least 5 who have written about it that I am aware of and I believe there were up to 30 medical professionals she saw over her 17 year ordeal.  It seems you have now moved from 'needing evidence' to clinging to false hope or a personal faith claim that there are no miracles.    

MayCaesar said:

I said no such thing, and what I personally believe is fairly irrelevant here. I am making epistemological arguments and asking you epistemological questions that can make use of this particular story as an example, but generalize far beyond it.

Next, "voice of God" was something you chose to present as a piece of evidence, and I pointed that Barbara's doctor's comment on it seems based solely on her words and his medical expertise does not at all contribute to its credibility. I asked you further on what basis you make the judgement on whether to take someone's words as expressions of factual truth or not; I asked you this question, at least, 5 times in slightly different variations, and have yet to see you address it.

Lastly, it does not seem sensible to me to reference someone's medical accreditation in support of their claim that a patient's recovery is a "miracle", since "miracle" is not a concept existing in the medical field. That is to say, any doctor claiming that a given event is miracle is not speaking as a doctor, but as a regular citizen with an opinion. 

You are really making me work here to keep this conversation going somewhere, my friend - and I do not think I am succeeding. Some cooperation would be very welcome.

You seem to me to have taken a Catch-22 or "Damned if you do, and damned if you don't" tactic.  If Barbara Cummiskey's doctor's had not said that her sudden recovery was indeed a miracle, a tactic would be to say "well, it doesn't sound like her recovery was medically impossible to me.  If it was then her doctor's would have called it a miracle".  You would have dismissed her claim because the doctor's didn't call it a miracle.  On the flip side, since several of her doctor's have claimed it is a miracle you have taken the tactic that you don't think doctor's should use that type of language.  However, her doctor's are all Mayo Clinic employees or have their training from the Mayo Clinic - they aren't shabby doctors.  They are the ones familiar with the specifics of her case and are in a place to be able to judge if what happened to her is medically possible.  What they said was very appropriate because her recovery was indeed medically impossible.  Calling a miracle a miracle, isn't being a bad doctor, but an honest one.  The fact that you don't like it, is not a reflection on them, but on your personal bias.  

You seem fixated on her claim she heard God's voice.  Do you have any evidence to suggest she is lying?  She immediately told her 2 friends in the room with her about hearing a voice tell her to get up.  She responded to the voice she claims she heard and did what should have been impossible for someone in her advanced stages of MS - she got up and walked.  In every account where she has told this story, that detail has been the same.  Personally, if you remove that element of the story, her story is still a miracle.  To me it seems like you are grasping at straws now.  The medical miracle part of the story has been firmly established.  You seem to want to dismiss those undeniable medical facts, supported by multiple medical records and doctors attesting to her miraculous recovery, because you can't personally confirm what God spoke to her.  Seems like a weak argument to me. 

just_sayin said:

You seem to me to have taken a Catch-22 or "Damned if you do, and damned if you don't" tactic.  If Barbara Cummiskey's doctor's had not said that her sudden recovery was indeed a miracle, a tactic would be to say "well, it doesn't sound like her recovery was medically impossible to me.  If it was then her doctor's would have called it a miracle".  You would have dismissed her claim because the doctor's didn't call it a miracle.  On the flip side, since several of her doctor's have claimed it is a miracle you have taken the tactic that you don't think doctor's should use that type of language.  However, her doctor's are all Mayo Clinic employees or have their training from the Mayo Clinic - they aren't shabby doctors.  They are the ones familiar with the specifics of her case and are in a place to be able to judge if what happened to her is medically possible.  What they said was very appropriate because her recovery was indeed medically impossible.  Calling a miracle a miracle, isn't being a bad doctor, but an honest one.  The fact that you don't like it, is not a reflection on them, but on your personal bias.  

You seem fixated on her claim she heard God's voice.  Do you have any evidence to suggest she is lying?  She immediately told her 2 friends in the room with her about hearing a voice tell her to get up.  She responded to the voice she claims she heard and did what should have been impossible for someone in her advanced stages of MS - she got up and walked.  In every account where she has told this story, that detail has been the same.  Personally, if you remove that element of the story, her story is still a miracle.  To me it seems like you are grasping at straws now.  The medical miracle part of the story has been firmly established.  You seem to want to dismiss those undeniable medical facts, supported by multiple medical records and doctors attesting to her miraculous recovery, because you can't personally confirm what God spoke to her.  Seems like a weak argument to me. 

There is no Catch-22 here. I am not talking in hypotheticals, but merely commenting on the doctor's words you voluntarily referenced. If you had not referenced those words, this discussion would not have happened in the first place. When something does not constitute a piece of evidence in favor of a claim, then you should not reference it as one: if you do, then it is a fair game to point out that you have made a mistake.

Another claim you have mistakenly attributed to me is that "I don't think doctor's should use that type of language". That is not what I said at all: I said that when a doctor does use that type of language, they do it not in their professional capacity, but as a regular citizen, and their credentials do not strengthen their claims.

I have not suggested that Barbara is lying either. I instead (now, at least, 6 times) asked what methodology you use to determine whether someone's words alone constitute factual claims or not - you refuse to address the question. Could it be that you do not have a good answer to it, answer demonstrating consistency in your reasoning?

And another attribute you erroneously attribute to me:

You seem to want to dismiss those undeniable medical facts, supported by multiple medical records and doctors attesting to her miraculous recovery, because you can't personally confirm what God spoke to her.  Seems like a weak argument to me. 

I am not sure why I "seem" to want to do that to you, for at no part in this discussion did I express such a desire or attempt to make this (indeed, weak) argument.

What's up, buddy? Why are you acting like this? Why are you talking to me as if I am a completely different person than I am?

@just_sayin you said that crap before and not one of them you said there said it was a miracle and the only one you said was a miracle didn’t. You made it up and paraphrazed it. You are getting worser by the minute with your lies.

I have also witnessed a miracle once. My grandfather was arguing with my grandmother, in his usual drunken fit. The argument went about as good as you could expect it, and my granddad grabbed an ax. Grandmother ran away and locked herself up in a sauna building. Grandfather started hitting the door with the ax and broke through, but tripped and fell down, hitting the wooden floor with his face and passing out. It is unbelievable how lucky my grandmother got that day.

As they say, god works in mysterious ways... Sometimes involving a bit of theatrics, it would seem.

@Barnardot

 All of your evidence is bogus because they are taken from bogus sites and made up. No genuine site posting genuine reports posts shoddy amateurish badly iphone copied news paper articles which are made up in the first place and written deliberately ambiguously. So all of your evidence is totally worthless made up crap 100% disproven end of story. So stop posting that rubbish over and over.

Sigh.  The documentation is not made up, nor are the websites.  The news stories are real.  The evidence of prayer working and of miracles is documented and overwhelming.  Your special pleading to pretend that the evidence is fake is just sad at this point.

The fact is there is an abundance of evidence that prayer works.  87 percent of people who pray claim they have had a prayer answered in the last year.  Rueters reports that:

“A third of all Americans (34 percent) say they have experienced or witnessed a divine healing of an illness or injury,”

That's a lot of eyewitnesses that you want to pretend didn't see what they saw.  There are over 1200 studies on prayer, with the majority of them showing that prayer works and that it has health benefits for the one who is prayed for.  Further, there is documented evidence of miracles as I have shown.  

You have engaged in a science of the gaps argument.  You have essentially claimed that even though science has no medical explanation for the miracles of the blind seeing, the lame walking, or the dead rising, that I have shared, that we should believe that 'almighty science has an answer'.  The problem with that desperate faith belief of yours, is that it is science which has claimed there is no medical explanation for the events I've described.  If there were, then you could replicate them.  But even though I challenged you to raise the dead, you FAILED to do so.  

It is the mark of a bad debater that has to stoop to denying credible sources.  I have provided written testimony from at least 3 doctors in the Barbara Cummiskey miracle where she was on her death bed, blind, with severe MS that make it impossible for her to walk, her lungs were barely functioning, and her intestines had stopped working.  Yet, after people prayed for her, she got up out of bed on her own, got her eyesight back, her lungs worked fine, and her internal organs were now fine.  That was verified by doctors within a short period of time.  At least 5 of her doctor's have said it was a miracle with no medical explanation possible.  Yet, because you are a bad debater, you want to pretend that evidence that I sited from books, newspaper articles, tv interviews, personal interviews, medical journals, and from hospital medical records is fake.  It seems obvious that the only one faking claims here is you.

Why is the bible thumper the one making the fact based arguments and the atheists seem to be making weak unsubstantiated claims?

GiantMan said:

Why is the bible thumper the one making the fact based arguments and the atheists seem to be making weak unsubstantiated claims?

The reason why the 'bible thumper' has dominated this debate with overwhelming evidence and facts, is because the evidence and facts that prayer works is overwhelming.  I don't know how much of this thread you have followed but to summarize:

1)  Several surveys show that people claim to have had a prayer answered in the past year and have either been healed or have witnessed a healing

a. 87% of Americans who pray say their prayers were answered in the last year: study
b. Spirit and Power – A 10-Country Survey of Pentecostals - Pew Research Center
c. A third of Americans report divine healing: Pew

2) Most peer reviewed studies on prayer show that prayer has positive outcomes for the one prayed for: (this includes systematic studies also):

a. Effects of intercessory prayer on patients with rheumatoid arthritis
b. A Randomized Trial of the Effect of Prayer on Depression and Anxiety
c. The Effect of Prayer on Depression and Anxiety: Maintenance of Positive Influence One Year after Prayer Intervention
d. A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Effects of Remote, Intercessory Prayer on Outcomes in Patients Admitted to the Coronary Care Unit
e. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE QUALITY OF RESEARCH ON HANDS-ON AND DISTANCE HEALING: CLINICAL AND LABORATORY STUDIES
f. The Efficacy of “Distant Healing A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials

3) There is strong evidence that modern miracles occur:

a. Case report of instantaneous resolution of juvenile macular degeneration blindness after proximal intercessory prayer
b. Case Report of gastroparesis healing: 16 years of a chronic syndrome resolved after proximal intercessory prayer
c. https://seangeorge.com.au/my-story/my-story/ , ; And the documented evidence here:
    https://seangeorge.com.au/my-story/medical-details/
    Raising the Dead: A Doctor Encounters the Miraculous
d. Barbara Cummisky Snyder is instantly healed of MS and blindness -
     https://1c15.co.uk/barbara-snyder-barbara-cummiskey-snyder-healed-from-multiple-sclerosis/
    Scott Kolbaba, Physician's Untold Stories: Miraculous Experiences  Doctors are Hesitant to Share with their Patients, or Anyone! (North Charleston, SC:          CreateSpace, 2016) (image of x-ray on page 121)
    https://www.scribd.com/document/534776708/Chicago-Tribune-Mon-Sep-26-1983-clipping

The reason that the case against prayer has been lacking is because the facts just aren't on their side.  That doesn't mean they won't make stuff up.  For example, one individual tried to argue that the reason we should ignore the miraculous healing of Barbara Cummisky is because her white cardiologist turns into a Black multi-millionaire Bishop of a church on the weekends.  I kid you not.  See

https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/167366/#Comment_167366
https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/167402/#Comment_167402

Maybe those who think prayer doesn't work should ask God to help them with their argument.  

Dee said:

http://

@just_sayin

***The reason why the 'bible thumper' has dominated this debate with overwhelming evidence and facts, is because the evidence and facts that prayer works is overwhelming***

Isn't the Christian god wonderful he answers the prayers of Americans according to your first link .....The Christian post ....ROFLMAO.....

Wonder why he ignored the payers of millions of Jews gassed by the Nazis , maybe you could ask him?

So, you just want a non-Christian website to mention the survey results?  OK how about Yahoo Finance?:

National Day of Prayer Study: 85% of Americans Connect with a Higher Power; Increasing their Practice During and Since Covid Lockdowns

Or how about this Vox (leftist) article:

48 percent of Americans pray every day. Here's what they pray for.


Gee, you don't have a prayer of winning this debate.  It would take a miracle for you to win.  

@just_sayin

You are making quite a jump in your arguments from "People say that X helps them" to "X helps people". How about all the people who swear by horoscopes, or a cup of raw apple cider vinegar per day, or a pill that is demonstrably a placebo - do you take their claims for facts without any questioning as well?

People tend to be confirmation bias machines. When someone prays daily and something great happens to them, they will be prone to assume that the prayer was the cause of that great happening - and when someone else who does not pray has the same thing happen to them, they will attribute it to luck or something else.

Virtually all of your arguments are based on self-serving testimonies and have no independent/impartial evidence supporting them. That is a very shaky ground to build one's world view on. I could find a lot of formerly religious atheists who will say that giving up religion was the single best decision of their lives, and make a similar argument to yours, but with the opposite conclusion - and where will we be then?

@just_sayin

That is the rubber though: people's perceptions are seriously influenced by their expectations. You know how a person with low confidence and a person with high confidence can have exactly identical interaction with someone, and the former will swear that the person disliked them, while the latter will swear that the person liked them? That is one of the reasons why you absolutely cannot substitute formal scientific approach with personal testimonies and the like. History is full of examples of deep collective confusion - do you think that the fact that virtually every single person in North Korea believes that their Dear Leader has magic powers makes the hypothesis that he actually does more plausible?

To answer your question directly: I am not sure which is more likely, but I am quite sure that hundreds of millions of people can easily be mistaken and that the numbers do not correlate with the plausibility of the hypothesis. Whichever is more likely, the fact that hundreds of millions of people believe that they have witnessed a "miracle" adds zero credibility to the claim that "miracles" happen.

That praying is correlated with certain positive health effects, I know well - yet it has no bearing on the validity of the claim that praying involves communing with some extraneous intelligent entity. Just like the fact that meditating has certain health benefits does not imply that meditating activates your "chakras", or that "chakras" even exist.

For the "miracle accounts", we have already gone over them, and the supporting documentation there did nothing to support the claim regarding the divinity of the nature of the recovery (not to mention that he alleged "recoveries" had very shoddy evidence supporting them).
Furthermore, do you not find it strange that 200 million people allegedly have received a miracle, yet only 5 miracles have been, as you claim, documented? 5 out of 200 million? Is there any other phenomenon in the Universe in which the rate of documentation is so infinitesimally small? If miracles were as commonplace as these people claim, we would have thousands of studies of cohorts of hundreds of subjects documenting "miracles" in great detail. Where are they?

You can mention "confirmation bias" as many times as you like, but, just like with the frequency of the claims of having witnessed a "miracle", increase in the number does nothing to increase the validity of the claim. I am a very open-minded person, humble with my perception of my knowledge and understanding of the world, and I absolutely love it when someone makes an argument that challenges my most fundamental beliefs and that I cannot immediately find an error in. If someone made a solid argument in favor of existence of "miracles", I would absolutely seriously consider it: I have no preference one way or the other, and, in fact, this world could use a little more magic.
In this case, however, my confirmation bias only makes me favor good argumentation and disfavor bad argumentation. I will go further and say that I am not nearly as interested in the conclusion of an argument, as I am in its structure. If the argument is sound and its conclusion is something I disagree with, I will accept it and think about revising my conclusion; if it is unsound, then, regardless of what the conclusion is, I will reject it and explain why. Which of the two cases is at play here, I am not a good judge of, yet I do think that my approach is sound, however flawed its practical application is.

@MayCaesar

For the "miracle accounts", we have already gone over them, and the supporting documentation there did nothing to support the claim regarding the divinity of the nature of the recovery (not to mention that he alleged "recoveries" had very shoddy evidence supporting them).

It appears you are adding some special pleading to your confirmation bias.  In the 5 examples of documented miracles I have provided, 2 people came back to life immediately after being prayed for, 1 instantly opened her blind eyes to see at the conclusion of a prayer, 1 was instantly healed after his dad prayed for him, and 1 blind woman on her death bed who had not walked in 7 1/2 years got up and danced in the rain immediately after 400 prayer requests had been delivered to her.  

You said there was shoddy evidence supporting the miracles.  Huh.  2 of the cases appeared in peer reviewed journals:

Case report of instantaneous resolution of juvenile macular degeneration blindness after proximal intercessory prayer

The medical doctor who came back from the dead provided his medical records online:

https://seangeorge.com.au/my-story/my-story/

And the documented evidence here:
https://seangeorge.com.au/my-story/medical-details/

And if you like detailed doctor's notes, you should see the story of Jeff Markin who had a massive heart attack and was declared dead.  Dr. Chauncey Crandall, a Yale educated cardiologist, had already filled out the paper work declaring the man dead, when he felt impressed to stop and pray for the man and then gave the guy one more shock against the wishes of the staff in the room.  Markin came back to life with no brain damage though his limbs had already shown signs of no oxygen.  This impacted the Dr so much that he recorded the story, with all the medical details you could ever want in a book: 

Raising the Dead: A Doctor Encounters the Miraculous

There are over 50 pages of medical records and notes alone, he even shows the death certificate.

How are 50 pages of medical records presented by a Yale Cardiologist, considered one of he best in his field,  'shoddy'?  Dr Sean George provided screen shots of his ECGs, his defibrillator  log, and several test results.  He provides a timeline.  I'm unsure what more he could give you that would convince you.  But, I suspect that's the real issue.  I don't think any amount of evidence will convince you

Furthermore, do you not find it strange that 200 million people allegedly have received a miracle, yet only 5 miracles have been, as you claim, documented? 5 out of 200 million? Is there any other phenomenon in the Universe in which the rate of documentation is so infinitesimally small? If miracles were as commonplace as these people claim, we would have thousands of studies of cohorts of hundreds of subjects documenting "miracles" in great detail. Where are they?

 Did you really think there are only 5 examples of miracles? Just because I've provided documentation for 5 miracles doesn't mean there aren't many more.  For example,  one of the 5 doctors who wrote about Barbara Cummiskey's miracle, Scott Kolbaba, also wrote about 12 other miracles that occurred at the Mayo Clinic that he was familiar with:  

Scott Kolbaba, Physician's Untold Stories: Miraculous Experiences  Doctors are Hesitant to Share with their Patients, or Anyone! (North Charleston, SC:          CreateSpace, 2016) 

I've quoted from the book Miracles Today, by Craig Keener about Barbara Cummiskey's healing.  The book covers her miracle in the preface.  That book documents at least 25 different miracles.  His 2 volume work on miracles (over 1000 pages) documents hundreds more.  

There are at least 70 documented miracles at the Lourdes location alone.  There are thousands of known modern miracle examples, not just the 5 I have mentioned in this discussion.  In reality, just 1 miracle would prove that there is a God and that he intervenes in human affairs, making prayer something that we should do.  

You have dismissed, out of hand, the survey results that reflect hundreds of millions of people.  You claimed they all have confirmation bias without a shred of evidence to back up your claim.  At least Dee provided a picture of Barbara Cummiskey's doctor whom he claimed turned into a wealthy Black bishop on the weekends.  He was hilariously wrong, but at least he tried.  It just seems to me, that it is far more likely that the confirmation bias is yours.

Just some FYI miracles are not preyers...

It might be best said as the proof of the powers of preyer.
"You can't always get what you want but if you try sometime, you'll find you get what you need.
 ", Mick Jagger Keith Richards, 1969, Album: Let it bleed.

Dee said:

@just_sayin

ARGUMENT TOPIC : JUST LYING CAUGHT LYING AGAIN., ALL BECAUSE HE STILL CANNOT ANSWER WHY HIS GOD ANSWERS ONLY  THE PRAYERS OF AMERICANS BUT NOT JEWS GETTING PUSHED INTO GAS CHAMBERS BY NAZIS.......A 

At least Dee provided a picture of Barbara Cummiskey's doctor whom he claimed turned into a wealthy Black bishop on the weekends. He was hilariously wrong, but at least he tried. It just seems to me, that it is far more likely that the confirmation bias is yours.


YOU DIDNT KNOW EVEN  CON WOMAN CUMMISKYS DOCTORS NAME YOUR  SUPPORTING EVIDENCE YOU BLURRED SO IT WAS VIRTUALLY UNREADABLE, THEN YOU CLAIMED THE DOCTOR DIDNT EXIST JUST LIKD YOUR GOD, THEN YOU COULDN'T DECIDE WHETHER HE WAS BLACK OR WHITE OR MALE OR FEMALE.

@Dee, I don't claim to know the mind of God, or why He answers some prayers, but not others.  Now, if you believe that there is such a thing as objective evil, such as the Holocaust, then that is really evidence that God exists.  If objective evil exists, then objective good must also exist.  And the only place OBJECTIVE good could come from would be an objective lawgiver.  Objective good can't come from individuals or groups, because what may be good to you, would not be good to a psychopath.  One group of people, like the Nazi's in 1940 Germany, may believe that it is good to kill Jews, while other groups may not.  So, your argument, though you didn't mean it to, actually suggests that there is a God.  You haven't proved that God doesn't answer prayer, you have only proved that people do evil things, and that objective evil exists - which actually proves God's existence.  Thank you for your contribution to this discussion

Regarding Cummiskey's doctor's name, I apologize, I am confusing miracles.  I meant the optometrist for Marolyn Ford Snyder, yet another miracle I've mentioned.  She got her eyesight back miraculously. 

I will remind you of my response to your claim that this doctor should not be trusted because he was a rich Black Bishop - see https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/167451/#Comment_167451

First, thank you for making me laugh so hard.  
You have completely gotten your information wrong.  The guy you referred to as a cardiologist is actually an Optometrist.  He is on OD, not a Bishop.  The guy you thought it was is this guy:
Bishop David G Evans

The guy who signed the document attesting to Marolyn Ford Snyder's eyesight is this guy
Dr. David G Evans

His bio says nothing about being a Bishop.  Here is what is says about him:

Dr. David Evans graduated from Southwest Baptist University in 1990, earning his B.S. in biology followed by his Doctorate of Optometry from Southern College of Optometry in 1994. Dr. Evans is currently an active member of the American Optometric Association, the Tennessee Optometric Association, and the West Tennessee Optometric Society. He has held office as the Vice-President of the West Tennessee Optometric Society in 1997, President of the West Tennessee Optometric Society in 1998, and Trustee of the Tennessee Optometric Association (1999-2002).

Dr. Evans has received many awards including the T.O.A Young Optometrist of the Year Award (1997), Bausch & Lomb Practice Initiation Award (1994), Designs for Low Vision Award (1994) and Outstanding Senior Clinician Award (1994). Dr. Evans has played a key role in a number of investigational research studies with Alcon, Ciba Vision, Pharmacia & Upjohn, Otsuka, Inspire Pharmaceuticals, Santen Incorporated, and Allergan.

@Dee,  I think you are need of the same kind of miracle that brought Marolyn Ford Snyder's eyesight back to her.  
Thank you for the hearty laugh.  LOL

I loved how you then went on to say that the award winning doctor was a con man because you found a bad review for him on yelp.  I love you man.  Keep it up.  LOL.  Here is our exchange:

Chauncy Crandall is a notorious scam artist and religious con artist. This id-ot when told his son had Leukemia went in search of faith healers to cure him and of course his son died , was god on a day off?

Crandell the con man clamied his recovery from a heart attack wax a miracle , you really are a gullible person , lets look at the truths regards your Christian "hero"......

https://thedamienzone.com/2013/08/24/dr-chauncey-crandall-rip-off-scam-four-things-heart-attack-rip-off-yes/

My response:

You are again slandering someone.  Dr Chauncy Crandall is a believer, and a very qualified doctor.  Anyone who thinks your website is from a sane rational person hasn't read it.  Seriously Dee, this is your 'proof'?

Dr. Chauncy Crandall has a 5 star rating on US News Health site: https://health.usnews.com/doctors/chauncey-crandall-21514
From his bio:

A distinguished member of various medical boards and fellowships, including the American Board of Internal Medicine, American Board of Cardiovascular Disease, and the American College of Cardiology, Dr. Crandall’s extensive contributions are published in reputable medical journals such as the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Circulation, The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, and the European Heart Journal. His involvement in numerous research studies and clinical trials attests to his commitment to advancing medical knowledge.

Again, thank you for bringing a smile to my face.  
.  

@just_sayin

My friend, you do not get to quote a line from a long and thought out comment, then zoom in on a small addition in the parentheses, and then drill on that. Please respond comprehensively to my comment.

I will indulge you here though. The two papers you cited are written by the same three authors, published in highly irreputable journals, and the text in them (which I did read as a courtesy to you) makes no assertions about the causal relation between prayer and the described events - furthermore, the data the studies reference is not available.
As for "coming back from the dead", in that context it is not a miracle, but a fairly well known (although poorly explained) phenomenon that occurs with some individuals. I am not aware of any data that makes a connection between the frequency of such events and prayer, but you are welcome to supply it.

First, I was asking about actual documented scientific evidence, not the "I met a guy who..." evidence, which is what those books contain. Second, no, a proof that a miracle (as in an event that appears inexplainable scientifically) has taken place would only suggest that our understanding of the Universe is vastly incomplete. It would not at all suggest that "god" exists and that the miracle is a result of divine intervention. Lastly, I made a much bigger claim than the one you are attributing to me: I said that everyone is a subject to confirmation bias. Which is why what people believe in and how often they believe in it has absolutely no bearing on what is true and what is not.

Once again, I am much more interested in quality of arguments than in conclusions. If there is god that responds to prayer, I would like to know it, and if praying consistently generates "miracles", it would be a curious phenomenon to explore. But "it would be nice if" is not the same as "it is", and to me what "is" is more interesting than what "should be". Whatever confirmation bias I may have, I completely remove when analyzing factual arguments - working in science forces you to get a habit of doing that. This means that when someone makes a claim, I assume a role of an ignorant stranger who knows nothing about the subject and genuinely wants to examine various lines of reasoning.
The line of reasoning you are proposing here in favor of god's existence and miracles is fairly weak, in my estimation, and I have seen much stronger religious arguments, some of which I did not have a response to at the time I heard it... Yours are not like that, unfortunately.

@MayCaesar

My friend, you do not get to quote a line from a long and thought out comment, then zoom in on a small addition in the parentheses, and then drill on that. Please respond comprehensively to my comment.

I will count you as my amigo also.  And I do like your debating style, even if I don't always agree with you.  I am assuming you are talking about 'shoddy' research.  I didn't see that as something ancillary.  To me, the fact that you can find so many doctors from Yale, Harvard, Stanford, and the Mayo Clinic verifying that medical science can not explain the events in question, yet they did happen, and taking their time to provide the medical documentation, and risking their credibility to do it, is definitely a supporting piece of evidence.  Would you not agree?

I will indulge you here though. The two papers you cited are written by the same three authors, published in highly irreputable journals, and the text in them (which I did read as a courtesy to you) makes no assertions about the causal relation between prayer and the described events - furthermore, the data the studies reference is not available.

I don't think that because I picked 2 papers written by the same 3 authors invalidates the content.  Does it sound rational to you to claim that if you come across 2 studies by researchers in that specific field that both studies must be invalid?  That's a weak argument.  

Claiming that because the 2 case studies come from Explore (Elsevier) therefore they are not respected, is somewhat dishonest in my opinion.  Remember these are case studies on miracles and prayer.  These are alternative medicine topics.  I wouldn't expect to see them in the New England Journal of Medicine.  Not because the information is not true, but because it is not replicable.  To me, the issue is do the case studies present the evidence in an accurate manner.  I believe they do.  

So don't believe the case studies make any assertions about the causal relation between prayer and the miracles?  Huh.  Let's look at one of them then.

Case report of instantaneous resolution of juvenile macular degeneration blindness after proximal intercessory prayer

Definitely not making any association in that title between a miracle and intercessory prayer at all (that's sarcasm, in case you couldn't tell).  

From the abstract:

She was diagnosed with macular degeneration (MD) and declared legally blind. In 1972, having been blind for over 12 years, the individual reportedly regained her vision instantaneously after receiving proximal-intercessory-prayer (PIP).

From the introduction:

This case report15 examines proximal intercessory prayer (PIP) associated with a remarkable recovery of vision in a JMD patient. 

From Therapeutic Focus and Assessment:

After completing a mobility training in May of 1972, the individual returned home and in August of 1972, one evening prior to going to bed, regained her vision instantaneously after receiving PIP from her husband. This experience occurred after approximately 13 years of blindness. The PIP was presented in a Christian tradition, extended to God as both asked for her eyesight to be restored that night.
When the couple went to bed later than normal (after midnight), her husband performed a hurried spiritual devotional practice (reading two Bible verses) and got on his knees to pray. She describes that they both began to cry as he began to pray, with a hand on her shoulder while she laid on the bed, and with great feeling and boldness he prayed: “Oh, God! You can restore […] eyesight tonight, Lord. I know You can do it! And I pray You will do it tonight.” At the close of the prayer, his wife opened her eyes and saw her husband kneeling in front of her, which was her first clear visual perception after almost 13 years of blindness.
The couple were not cessationists (i.e., believing that spiritual gifts such as glossolalia, healing, and prophecy are not for the present age), but they had never heard of anyone receiving a miraculous healing in the present day. The patient reported, “The only healings we knew about were in the Bible”.

Consistent with this hypothesis, studies of other in-person practices with curative intent such as Reiki have also suggested ANS stimulation effects,42., 43., 44. although we are not aware of other cases of blindness healing by CAM therapies other than PIP. In the current case, it appears as the tears were not the cause of healing, but rather they may have been a by-product of the ANS being stimulated through the PIP intervention.
In summary, the patient was blind for thirteen years because of a condition that appeared to be a severe form of Stargardt's disease. Following a PIP event, her vision was spontaneously restored and remains intact to date, 47 years later. 

It seems to me that you are in some ways attacking the case study because it is not a study of Proximity Intercessory Prayer rather than just a case study of what happened.  It seems like you want to argue 'yeah, well a miracle did happen.  But its not connected to prayer.'  But prayer happens immediately before the event and seems significant to the people who witnessed the event.  If I learned that a miracle happened right after prayer occurred, I am not sure I could make the leap of faith that you have and claim it is disconnected with that act.

First, I was asking about actual documented scientific evidence, not the "I met a guy who..." evidence, which is what those books contain. Second, no, a proof that a miracle (as in an event that appears inexplainable scientifically) has taken place would only suggest that our understanding of the Universe is vastly incomplete. 

I provided evidence from eyewitnesses. For instance in the case of Barbara Cummiskey, I have provided tv interviews with her, quotes from her doctors, cited quotes by her physicians in the Chicago Tribune, and a medical document with a signed note from her main doctor.  That doesn't seem to be a 'I met a guy who...' scenario.  

When you say that miracle would only suggest that our understanding of the universe is vastly incomplete, you are making a 'science of the gaps' argument.  If the situation was reversed and I made a God of the gaps kind of argument you would call me on it.  It is not reasonable to on the one hand say 'all knowing science explains what happened' and then when I ask 'well, what's the answer then?' and you have to respond 'there isn't any scientific or medical explanation for what happened yet.'  You are begging the question.  Science has claimed it can't explain what happened.  It does not logically follow that it will be able to do so in the future.  Your claim that it will, is a faith claim with no evidence in these specific cases to support that basis.  If you think I'm mistaken, I'll gladly quote Barbara Cummiskey's doctor's to you.  There is no ambiguity in their claims.  Remember they had sent her home to die.  

If there is god that responds to prayer, I would like to know it, and if praying consistently generates "miracles", it would be a curious phenomenon to explore. 

At some point we should really define what we mean by miracles.  I go with the original Hebrew and Koine Greek meanings of the word, also one of the definitions given by Webster - "an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs."  This definition does not claim that a miracle is physically or naturally impossible, only extraordinary and involves God's intervention.    Miracles by definition are 'extraordinary' events.  By definition, miracles are not consistent happenings that one can plan or program.  

There are other definitions used for miracles.  Catholics use a much stricter definition in their verification process.  There definition would exclude any natural explanation.  I'm happy to go into further if we venture into any Catholic confirmed miracles, like at Lourdes.  Hume essentially argued that miracles are logically impossible.  A miracle to him was a violation of natural law, and sense all things are observed in the natural universe, there can be no miracles.  By his very definition, he claimed there was no evidence of them.  That's a very deceptive tactic.  It makes its conclusion before investigation.  Is it possible for a being beyond space-time to operate within His creation and do something that is beyond natural explanation?  If you say no, without an investigation, you aren't really interested in an honest answer.

The line of reasoning you are proposing here in favor of god's existence and miracles is fairly weak, in my estimation, and I have seen much stronger religious arguments, some of which I did not have a response to at the time I heard it... Yours are not like that, unfortunately.

This is great.  The obvious question from me is since you have seen the evidence for Barbara Cummiskey's miracle where she had been unable to walk and blind, what's the medical explanation for what happened to her then?  Whose voice do you think she heard that happened to tell her to get up right at the moment her eyesight came back, her collapsed lung filled up, her atrophied legs started working, and her intestines started working again? This should be an interesting response.  Looking forward to hearing your explanation.