Is the Bible reliable?

[Root of Jesse]

Yes, this is a denial of miracles. You make no distinction between a natural event and a miraculous event like the Resurrection. You're actually getting into areas of essential christianity with this view.

Just because you don't see the distinction doesn't mean there isn't one. And just because you say it's a denial of miracles doesn't make it so. And who do you think you are to judge my Christianity?

 

[Calminian]

Just because you don't see the distinction doesn't mean there isn't one. And just because you say it's a denial of miracles doesn't make it so. And who do you think you are to judge my Christianity?

But this is your argument that you were using. You brought up the issue that everything is a miracle, not me. I just merely pointed out to you the biblical difference between a miracle and a natural event. You denied it.

If you believe there is a distinction tell me what it is. I'm merely reflecting your own comments.

And who are you to judge the way I'm judging your statements!!

 

[Root of Jesse]

But this is your argument that you were using. You brought up the issue that everything is a miracle, not me. I just merely pointed out to you the biblical difference between a miracle and a natural event. You denied it.

And who are you to judge the way I'm judging your statement!!

So God has nothing to do with nature? Is he not the Lord of sea and sky as well as the Resurrection? If something happens that you think you can explain, you haven't explored it deeply enough. You can explain the mechanics of breathing, but you cannot explain why those mechanics happen. And since a miracle is something we have no explanation for, breathing is a miracle.
Since you're so sure that I don't believe in miracles, or deny them, or whatever...do you believe the miracles that happened at Fatima, Portugal in 1917? The miracle of the sun? How about the one that happened in Mexico in 1531? What about the one that took place in Lepanto in 1571? What about the Miracle of Lanciano? Well, I believe them all. And yet I also believe the breath I just took was caused by God, with as much explanation as all of those I mentioned above.

 

[Calminian]

So God has nothing to do with nature? ....

ROJ, you're all over the place. I gave you my definition of nature. Yes, God upholds all things. Even Paul agreed with my definition for pete's sake. This is not an issue that divides the church. You happen to be at odds with all of christianity with your view that everything is a miracle. Don't get mad at me, I'm just the messenger.

 

[Root of Jesse]

ROJ, you're all over the place. I gave you my definition of nature. Yes, God upholds all things. Even Paul agreed with my definition for pete's sake. This is not an issue that divides the church. You happen to be at odds with all of christianity with your view that everything is a miracle. Don't get mad at me, I'm just the messenger.

Of course, you ignored the direct questions I asked you...I'm not mad at you. I don't know you, how would you make me mad.

Your difference is theological, brother. Catholics, at least devout ones, think differently than you. Again, it's not my problem that your theology is different. You want to use the textbook definition, that's fine, but it's not the only definition.

 

[Calminian]

Of course, you ignored the direct questions I asked you...I'm not mad at you. I don't know you, how would you make me mad.

Generally when someone starts complaining about "judging their christianity," it's out of anger. It looks too weird to say that with a smile. LOL.

Your difference is theological, brother. Catholics, at least devout ones, think differently than you. ...

Nope, catholics are on my side on this one. You're out there with the crazies.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Generally when someone starts complaining about "judging their christianity," it's out of anger. It looks too weird to say that with a smile. LOL.

Nope, catholics are on my side on this one. You're out there with the crazies.

So you know all the Catholics? LOL yourself. And there you go again, placing your judgments on people. But mad? Nope. To use your word.

But we believe that miracles are either natural or supernatural. This (CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Miracle) is the belief of the Catholic Church, regardless of what individual Catholics may believe.

 

[Calminian]

So you know all the Catholics? LOL yourself. And there you go again, placing your judgments on people. But mad?...

LOL.

But we believe that miracles are either natural or supernatural. This (CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Miracle) is the belief of the Catholic Church, regardless of what individual Catholics may believe.

Which undermines your whole point. You said

"The fact is that everything is a miracle. God's Creation is a miracle, so everything within it is as well."

Now you're backtracking. that was responding to my point.

No, it's not. It's just admitting that Science and Faith describe the same thing in different ways.
But let me ask you something. When you look at the act of breathing, isn't it miraculous?

No not in the sense of the classical definition of miracles. Natural processes were brought about by miracles, but they are now normative processes. They're sustained and upheld by God, but not special acts of God. They are normative and uniform and repeating, while miracles are special non-uniform non-repeating.

All processes are upheld by God, such as births, heartbeats and death. They are repeating normative observable processes. Resurrections from the dead, creation of wine from water, on the other hand, are not normative, nor repeatable for observational purposes. They are miracles.

Makes sense?

Like I said, you're all over the map with equivocations. Your point has become meaningless in the context of the conversation. Classical miracles are violations of science. They are not the same as natural events were marvel at and sometimes call miracles.

Here's the bottom line. If you believe in classical miracles like the ones Jesus performed, your belief in science is limited. There's no way around it.

 

[Root of Jesse]

LOL.



Which undermines your whole point. You said

"The fact is that everything is a miracle. God's Creation is a miracle, so everything within it is as well."

Now you're backtracking. that was responding to my point.



Like I said, you're all over the map with equivocations. Your point has become meaningless in the context of the conversation. Classical miracles are violations of science. They are not the same as natural events were marvel at and sometimes call miracles.

Here's the bottom line. If you believe in classical miracles like the ones Jesus performed, your belief in science is limited. There's no way around it.

Look, friend. I'm Catholic. I believe what the Catholic Church teaches. If you bothered to click on the link, you would see what that teaching is. I don't really care what other Catholics want to believe, if it's not in keeping with what the Church teaches.
You're talking about wonders of a peculiar kind. That's one kind of miracle. But everything is a miracle, and how that denies that miracles happen, I have to shrug my shoulders.
The point of this thread is "Is the Bible reliable"? And I affirm that it is. TTFN.

 

[ebia]

Look, friend. I'm Catholic. I believe what the Catholic Church teaches. If you bothered to click on the link, you would see what that teaching is. I don't really care what other Catholics want to believe, if it's not in keeping with what the Church teaches.
You're talking about wonders of a peculiar kind. That's one kind of miracle. But everything is a miracle, and how that denies that miracles happen, I have to shrug my shoulders.
The point of this thread is "Is the Bible reliable"? And I affirm that it is. TTFN.

I think it's pretty clear that the point of the thread is not really "is the bible reliable" at all.

 

[ebia]

LOL.

Like I said, you're all over the map with equivocations. Your point has become meaningless in the context of the conversation. Classical miracles are violations of science. They are not the same as natural events were marvel at and sometimes call miracles.

Because of course the pre-scientific world thought of miracles in terms of science, even though they didn't have science. You can see St Luke, for instance, saying "hey that's impressive because even when they invent science, whatever that is, it won't explain it"

 

[Calminian]

Look, friend. I'm Catholic. I believe what the Catholic Church teaches. If you bothered to click on the link, you would see what that teaching is. I don't really care what other Catholics want to believe, if it's not in keeping with what the Church teaches.
You're talking about wonders of a peculiar kind. That's one kind of miracle. But everything is a miracle, and how that denies that miracles happen, I have to shrug my shoulders.
The point of this thread is "Is the Bible reliable"? And I affirm that it is. TTFN.

Then admit you were just throwing out random thoughts that really had nothing to do with anything. you just wanted to explore the semantic range of the term miracle. I would suggest maybe keeping things like that to yourself, if it really doesn't pertain to the discussion.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Then admit you were just throwing out random thoughts that really had nothing to do with anything. you just wanted to explore the semantic range of the term miracle. I would suggest maybe keeping things like that to yourself, if it really doesn't pertain to the discussion.

So promoting the truth is throwing out random thoughts...based on your logic, I'll ignore the rest of what you said, as well as your suggestion. I would suggest that you stop offering such advice to people you don't know.

 

[Calminian]

Because of course the pre-scientific world thought of miracles in terms of science, even though they didn't have science. You can see St Luke, for instance, saying "hey that's impressive because even when they invent science, whatever that is, it won't explain it"

Yes, the pre-scientific world understood the concept of normative processes vs. miraculous ones. They didn't speak english and use our exact modern terms, but it's stilly to think they did not know that miracles were violations of normal repeating processes which science happens to be the study of.

So I appreciate your attempt at sarcasm, but it only works when you're right.

 

[Root of Jesse]

LOL.



Which undermines your whole point. You said

"The fact is that everything is a miracle. God's Creation is a miracle, so everything within it is as well."

Now you're backtracking. that was responding to my point.



Like I said, you're all over the map with equivocations. Your point has become meaningless in the context of the conversation. Classical miracles are violations of science. They are not the same as natural events were marvel at and sometimes call miracles.

Here's the bottom line. If you believe in classical miracles like the ones Jesus performed, your belief in science is limited. There's no way around it.

So it's not possible to believe in miracles and believe in science? What a riot! Science explains the explainable. Miracles, by definition, are not explainable. And at some point, everything in the real world is not explainable.

 

[Calminian]

So promoting the truth is throwing out random thoughts...based on your logic, I'll ignore the rest of what you said, as well as your suggestion. I would suggest that you stop offering such advice to people you don't know.

Actually "promoting" has several meanings. You don't deny that promotion is a form of advertising right? Certainly you don't believe advertising is always true.

Just an example of the silliness you bring to threads. Again, I would suggest you not just spew off topic knowledge (yes, this is advise to someone I don't know).

 

[Calminian]

So it's not possible to believe in miracles and believe in science? What a riot! Science explains the explainable. Miracles, by definition, are not explainable. And at some point, everything in the real world is not explainable.

Total misunderstanding of science. I actually am sensing a worship of science on your part. Science cannot explain everything. It is a limited epistemology. It can only explain things based on its understanding of natural processes. When things are not natural and repeating, other means are needed to explain it.

And there are things that can be explained, but are outside of science. Miracles are the best example. God and his special acts outside of nature can be explained theo-logically (thinking logically about God). But they cannot be explained theo-scientifically, which is what you are in essence trying to do. What you've done is placed God inside the box of natural laws, not realizing that God Himself made those law and transcends them. He upholds them but is not bound to act within them as they are his creation. But God by nature is logical, and thus will aways act logically.

What's happened in the minds of most, considering the current science worship in our modern time, is science has been confused with logic, and this is a tragic mistake. Science to be sure, must be logical, but logic is not confined to science. RoJ, it's time you start thinking logically.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Actually "promoting" has several meanings. You don't deny that promotion is a form of advertising right? Certainly you don't believe advertising is always true.

Just an example of the silliness you bring to threads. Again, I would suggest you not just spew off topic knowledge (yes, this is advise to someone I don't know).

Why is everything either/or to you? There are other colors than black and white. I don't have an either/or mind. I believe in both/and. That's the basic difference between us. I believe that, just because one thing is true, in most cases doesn't make something else false. So the fact that, to me, breathing is a miracle of God, that God gave me my life, in no way shuts out the science of how that happened. But it does not explain everything, which is the definition of what a miracle is. Study the Latin term.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Total misunderstanding of science. I actually am sensing a worship of science on your part. Science cannot explain everything. It is a limited epistemology. It can only explain things based on its understanding of natural processes. When things are not natural and repeating, other means are needed to explain it.

I only worship God. So better check those senses, LOL. I do have a love of science. I like learning how things work.

And there are things that can be explained, but are outside of science. Miracles are the best example. God and his special acts outside of nature can be explained theo-logically (thinking logically about God). But they cannot be explained theo-scientifically, which is what you are in essence trying to do. What you've done is placed God inside the box of natural laws, not realizing that God Himself made those law and transcends them. He upholds them but is not bound to act within them as they are his creation. But God by nature is logical, and thus will aways act logically.

Look, I get what you're saying. You're speaking of supernatural miracles. I don't limit miracles to supernatural. The very fact that there is science depends on the fact that there is God. The laws of Thermodynamics exist because of God. The fact that the oxygen content of our atmosphere is what it is, and not 5% different one way or another, is a miracle.

What's happened in the minds of most, considering the current science worship in our modern time, is science has been confused with logic, and this is a tragic mistake. Science to be sure, must be logical, but logic is not confined to science. RoJ, it's time you start thinking logically.

Suggesting that I don't. There you go making assumptions again...

 

[Calminian]

I only worship God. So better check those senses, LOL. I do have a love of science. I like learning how things work.
Look, I get what you're saying. You're speaking of supernatural miracles. I don't limit miracles to supernatural. The very fact that there is science depends on the fact that there is God. The laws of Thermodynamics exist because of God. The fact that the oxygen content of our atmosphere is what it is, and not 5% different one way or another, is a miracle.


Suggesting that I don't. There you go making assumptions again...

I highly doubt you get what I'm saying, being that "supernatural miracles" is redundant. I have no idea which God you worship. I can't make a statement about that either way. You don't need to have a perfect understanding of science and miracles to go to heaven. You just need to trust in Christ as your Lord and Savior (not by works, less any man should boast). I just know you're confused about science and miracles.