• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Evidence for Miracles?

philadiddle

Drumming circles around you
Dec 23, 2004
3,719
56
44
Canada
Visit site
✟4,522.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
...How do you explain Paul Seeley's paper on the firmament?....

I don't know about Seeley per se on that issue, but I am familiar with his paper. It was thoroughly refuted by JP Holding. In fact Holding thumped him on the issue of the firmament not being heaven—an issue I bring up a lot. Seeley tried to claim that the firmament was a barrier between the heavens and the earth. Yet, scripture says the firmament is the heavens.

Seeley also has a fallacious paper on the 3 tiered universe theory—heaven, earth, under the earth. This is of course in conflict with scripture that describes the world as heaven earth and sea. Even Seeley is all his prestige didn't understand the translation of erets.

We already know that a miralce goes against the laws of nature as we know them. That's what a miracle is. My question was, is there any evidence that contradicts the story of Jesus rising from the dead?

So your taking scientific evidence off the table? Interesting.

Pick one of these that you would like to defend and I'll show you why it's a farse.

You missed the point.

The difference is that alternative explanations are rooted in facts and observations, instead of a misunderstanding of the natural sciences. Like I said, pick any one you want and I'll show you why it's a farse.

IOW's you'll show an alternative natural explanation. We get it.

They skeptics would have done the same with the wine Christ created.
 
Upvote 0

philadiddle

Drumming circles around you
Dec 23, 2004
3,719
56
44
Canada
Visit site
✟4,522.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You don't know about Seeley on that issue but you're familiar with his paper on that issue? That seems to be a contradiction.

For the record, I have read AiGs refutation of his paper and it's terrible, but there's no point in arguing over it with you. My point was this:

1) You said theologians interpret Genesis differently because of modern science.
2) I showed you examples of where it was based purely on theology and an understanding of the cultural context. I also showed you that theologians interpretted it in a non-literal way long before modern science came around.
3) Logically from 2 you are wrong about 1.

So your taking scientific evidence off the table? Interesting.
No, I'm taking scientific laws off the table because that is what a miracle is. Do you understand that?

Why can't you just answer a question for once? Are there any facts that contradict Jesus rising from the dead? For example, are there other books written from that era that say they saw Jesus body in the tomb 5 days after his execution?

You missed the point.
Your point is only meaningful if those are legitimate facts. Since they are not, your point is moot.
 
Upvote 0

shernren

you are not reading this.
Feb 17, 2005
8,463
515
38
Shah Alam, Selangor
Visit site
✟33,881.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
In Relationship
When walking on the beach and you come across a sand castle or sand sculpture, do you conclude it to be a miracle?

Do you conclude it to have formed via naturalistic processes?

(Think a bit harder about that, actually, and you'll be well on your way to understanding the grave flaws in the watchmaker argument.)

If the earth really is young via a miracle of God (creation) then we would expect to see data that shows an apparently older than actual age. We would also expect to see anomalies like the ones listed above.

Honestly, now. Suppose all imaginable dating mechanisms pointed, by conventional scientific analysis, to the earth being anywhere between 6,000 to 10,000 years old. By your own words, if the earth really is young via a miracle of God (creation), then we would expect to see data that shows an apparently older than actual age - so if all the data points to it being a few thousand years old, it can't have been miraculously formed and the Bible is wrong!

Your own reasoning leads us into the absurdity of making evidence for a young earth evidence against YECism. One might as well believe more that a miraculous cure has occurred the more symptoms of the original disease remain - that the lame are most healed when they still limp and the blind most healed when they can't yet see.

Once we put it that way, it's quite clear that you don't actually believe that miracles in general don't leave scientific evidence. Rather, you're busy trying to justify just this one miracle which you don't have scientific evidence for.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: philadiddle
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican

All I can say is you completely misunderstood..... again!

It' not a hard concept, but I can't force someone to understand it.
 
Upvote 0