The point of the post had more to do with the circumstance surrounding his saving himself from organ donation after being declared "dead"...and the view his family, friends and community had on the matter.... than this boys character, but me thinks you knew that......

It only takes a handful of these type things to perpetuate the belief in faith....things like this give the rest "hope" they will benefit from such a "miracle"...if not in the past or now, but possibly the future.

Thats because logic and reasoning have no answer here, and offer no hope.

I could have as easily have left off the reference to hope and said "Thats because logic and reasoning have no answer here." and left it at that.

What answer does logic and reasoning have for these "recoveries" that defies both?

The medical profession has very strict guidelines to determine brain death formulated from science and used with logic and reasoning...and are then applied...and then something like this happens (and this by all means is not the first time someone awakens from "irreversable" coma/vegetative state/brain death.....what does science, logic and reason have to say about this?

I added the reference to hope....because to me if ones way of looking at life through science, logic and reasoning is left with absolutely no answers to a single observed phenomena that repeats itself, then most likely science, logic and reasoning doesn't have answers to others.....

To me...no answers is no hope.


I'm sorry, maybe I should have been more clear:

faith–noun
1.   confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
2.   belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3.   belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.   belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.


hope –noun
1.   the feeling that what is wanted can be had or that events will turn out for the best: to give up hope.
2.   a particular instance of this feeling: the hope of winning.
3.   grounds for this feeling in a particular instance: There is little or no hope of his recovery.
4.   a person or thing in which expectations are centered: The medicine was her last hope.

So simply, faith would be belief in something...and hope is the wanting of something to happen.

In this example, the hope is placed at the feet of faith.


This may be a poor example of what you wish to say, because "reason" has very different meanings depending on how it is used, I will use both:

The "reason" to cross the bridge is your motivation to cross...you need something and the bridge is the way to get there.

You "hope" you cross, because that is what you want to happen.

You have "faith" you will cross, because you have crossed many bridges before and have never seen one fail.

You have "reasoned" to cross the bridge because you need something, the bridge is the way to get there, you want this to happen and you do so because you have crossed many bridges before and have never seen one fail.


I am actually quite comfortable with the terminology as it exists in common usage and dictionarys.


I think you would have a tough time convincing the family, friends and community of anything different.

What answer would science, logic and reasoning offer these people since it was science, logic and reasoning that declared him dead and said it was OK to cut him open and take his beating heart.


I think you misunderstood me.

If you are referring to "the circumstance surrounding his saving himself from organ donation after being declared "dead"...what I meant by him "saving himself" was he reached up and grabbed the nurse...I didn't mean anything more than that.

If faith was all that kept us alive, then John Paul, Mother Theresa and Billy Graham would still be with us.


You can't test for it....it is faith...not math.


Just as "reason" has different contexts, so does "faith"...and just as there are different religions, so too are the way each one defines "faith"....


Satan has no control over God, only man.

If one believes miracles are by God, then Satan has nothing to do with it.

I think this what they are saying.  That it is a "feel-good" move you make, that you have reasoned in a way that makes you feel good about your actions.

The problem with this is how does someone then claim that "one must have faith in the Lord" or some such thing.

Why?

Not because you are right, but becuase it feels good feeling that you are right? And it certainly doesn't fill in any knowledge.

Yes, Pat, there is a bit of a problem in the way you are presenting this.

You are saying Sience doesn't have an answer and can be flawed, then you praise it for correctly (i assume) assessing a condition absolutely correctly.

That is, how do you know that the coma was irreversible? Based on the best evidence available and the metrics they use for a majority of cases.

I am sure you are more aware of the practice in medicine that they assess conditions based on the likelihood of previous symptoms, and the doctors often err on the side of caution, not comfort.


That is, it would take a hell of a lot more for me to accept that a person who has been declared dead for a little while and comes back,(especially in a brain dead state) as some miracle.

A miracle is when a guy is dead for three days, rigor mortis has set in and his cell structure is irrevocably damaged, and then he wakes up and walks around without scaring children... Though, he may scar children.... ;-)

And some of those things are valid obstacles to understanding what may have really happened. Since we don't know, we don't chalk it up to Supernaturalism the first moment we get.  We say "we don't know" and try to find out.

After all, maybe god is trying to leave us clues and wants us to discover the material reality?

I don't know what further investigation can be done. Presumably the family would be able to consent in such cases. I do know that just because we don't know something doesn't mean it was a 'miracle'.

I don't know why you are talking about exonerating science - science can't be wring because science never claims to be right, simply that based on all available evidence at the time X is most likely true.