- Apr 15, 2012
- 64,493
- 30,322
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
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.
Revelation speaks of Evil performing miracles...signs and wonders. What will you think if/when you see it?
Problem is....the authors of the bible were often very harsh on the prophets.
Was Jesus’ miracle work unique? - Centre for Public Christianity
"Turning to the Jewish world of the time, two names stand out as potential candidates for Jesus-like miracle workers. The first is Honi the Circle-drawer, active early in the 1st-century BC (he died around 65 BC), and the second is Hanina ben Dosa, who probably died sometime before AD 70. Interestingly, both men were from Galilee, Jesus’ home district, leading the great Jewish scholar, Geza Vermes of Oxford University, to make much of the connection between Jesus, Honi and Hanina. All three, he says, were part of a tradition of Galilean Hasidim or Devout ones who were known for their nearness to God and spiritual powers."
And these were just two of the famous ones -- the ancient world was a very superstitious place.
Maybe I've read too much Neil Gaiman, but my favorite crazy theory is that the ancient world actually was full of miracles and deities
Now, for this thread, I want to define "miracle" as "The overt suspension of natural laws by the divine or agent of the divine in order to achieve a divine purpose."
That said, are the miracle stories as they are described in the Old and New Testaments meant to be interpreted as depictions of actual events?
And if so, do those depictions bring people closer to an understanding of God, or further away?
Because it seems to me that stories of a God who can miraculously bend/break the natural laws of the universe at will raise a lot of awkward questions about the countless times He chooses not to.
Consider:
- God rains manna from the heavens to feed the Israelites.... today, millions are starving.
- God -- either personally or through His prophets -- heals the sick and infirm and even raises the dead... today, millions suffer and die.
- God -- again either personally or through His prophets -- commands the forces of nature... today, drought, storms, earthquakes, etc... kill millions.
Now, I'm not asking "why do bad things happen?" But rather, "would we even have to ask these questions if we didn't assume that miracles were actual historic acts?"
Thoughts?
You can use a lesser instrument to get the general idea across... you can play the Ninth on a kazoo, but would it really be the same?
Similarly, to speak the "divine" language, one would need a divine instrument... and we who are mere mortals and not gods simply do not have one... even if we accept some small measure of the divine by virtue of being made in God's image, that just gives us the kazoo; we still don't have the orchestra.
Maybe I've read too much Neil Gaiman, but my favorite crazy theory is that the ancient world actually was full of miracles and deities, and that the birth of Christianity really did spell the twilight of the gods.Wild, for sure, but there's fun stuff out there like Plutarch commenting at the end of the first century that the oracles had fallen silent.
In your finite mind, sure.
If I only played Da Da Da Dum on my Kazoo for anyone, they would know exactly what I was playing. no Orchestra needed.
Da Da Da dum on any instrument is still Da Da da Dum.
The point you don't understand is that God is the Orchestra, and you don't posses the ability to read the music.
Therefore your misunderstanding.
Not exactly -- "enjoyment" isn't the point; the point is to convey a divine idea using a tool (human language) that simply isn't equipped to express it.
Consider the example I used earlier with Beethoven... to speak the "language" of music, you need a musical instrument... preferably the right one for the piece... You can't "speak" the Ninth Symphony, you can only play it -- preferably with a full orchestra.
You can use a lesser instrument to get the general idea across... you can play the Ninth on a kazoo, but would it really be the same?
Similarly, to speak the "divine" language, one would need a divine instrument... and we who are mere mortals and not gods simply do not have one... even if we accept some small measure of the divine by virtue of being made in God's image, that just gives us the kazoo; we still don't have the orchestra.
This assumes that any such story is "just a fictional story" -- I make no such assumption. The Bible is not limited to being "complete truth" or "complete fiction"; there's an entire spectrum in between. The same can be true of any ancient (and not-so-ancient) writings; it's just a question of where it falls on the spectrum.
Not quite -- I actually said I didn't want one of those discussions. The bigger picture is this: The more we learn of history, science, medicine, etc., etc.... the less it all supports a literal and historically accurate Bible... unless we start shoehorning a lot more miracles in there, and assume that God's had His thumb on the cosmic scales all along.
I saw this all the time back when I debated over in the creation/evolution forum... so I thought it interesting to explore the concept of "miracle" as it already exists in the Bible... personally, I prefer a world with fewer miracles... less headaches.
I do not agree with your quote, because the sting of death has been removed for Christians.One way to look at it -- not quite the Biblical way, since Death is specifically "the last enemy that shall be destroyed," and such a worldview raises some equally awkward questions regarding who's "good" and who's "bad." But let's continue.
I understand what you are trying to say, but I am talking about a commitment which can and should grow when challenged. If those hypocrites were really thinking about the brevity of life, they might not have gone to the strip show and listened harder to the preacher. I very much agree with you that this is more the norm in the West than the exception. I see the Church needing severe persecution in the West to weed out the hypocrites, strengthen our commitment and allow people to see what Christ is really likeMany of us already realize this, belief in God or not.
In the words of James Douglas Morrison, "the future's uncertain and the end is always near."
.On the flip side, you might turn too early... and too often.
In the words of Anton Szandor LaVey, “On Saturday night, I would see men lusting after half-naked girls dancing at the carnival, and on Sunday morning when I was playing organ for tent-show evangelists at the other end of the carnival lot, I would see these same men sitting in the pews with their wives and children, asking God to forgive them and purge them of carnal desires. And the next Saturday they'd be back at the carnival or some other place of indulgence."
The notion of God "allowing" sinning is a strange one, since I define "sin" as an act in disobedience to God... but is it really disobedience if He says "it's okay, I'll allow it"?
But sin is a topic for another time; this thread is about miracles.
That would be a God-of-the-gaps theology, and it's a theologically shaky position to take. Anything we can't explain scientifically today we might figure out tomorrow... and where does God go then?
In fact, our world is full of things we couldn't explain yesterday that make perfect sense today... what has that done to God?
Answer: Nothing... to God, but it's put His followers in a tizzy. Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Franklin, Darwin, Freud... every time someone has opened the door to the unknown, there have always been those desperate to slam it shut "in the name of God." So let's not worship the gaps in our knowledge on the assumption that God's in there... somewhere.
Think about this for a moment:That can happen, but my observations have been quite the opposite. Again, I'm drawing on my experience over in the Creation/Evolution forums...
On the one hand, There is a Creator who spent six painstaking days on this one little planet, and *POOF*ed the rest of the cosmos into being with little more than an idle thought... all for you to have dominion over... because you are the most important thing in His creation.
On the other, the more we learn, the more we know, the more we see that each answer raises a dozen new questions, and as we try to wrap our heads around creation, we see, in the words of Douglas Noel Adams, "you are given just one momentary glimpse of the entire unimaginable infinity of creation, and somewhere in it a tiny little marker, a microscopic dot on a microscopic dot, which says 'You are here.'”
One of those experiences is far more humbling than the other, IMO.
It all makes it more likely it actually happened.
Problem is....the authors of the bible were often very harsh on the prophets.
In a pre-scientific world where anything unknown must be the work of either the divine or the demonic, I'm sure it felt that way...
Eh, I don't think that's a fair characterization of the ancient world. You had proto-scientists like Aristotle out there also, so it wasn't as if people weren't exploring ideas like physics before modern science came along. (If they hadn't been, there'd have never been modern science in the first place.)
Most people write good history about themselves.It all makes it more likely it actually happened.
An oversimplification, yes, but let's remember that people such as Aristotle were famous precisely because they were few and far between. The average Greek citizen of the time wouldn't be familiar with his work, to say nothing of the average Israelite.
The common folk had almost no exposure to scientific learning -- it was a world where superstition still held sway... here there be dragons.
I do not agree with your quote, because the sting of death has been removed for Christians.
I understand what you are trying to say, but I am talking about a commitment which can and should grow when challenged. If those hypocrites were really thinking about the brevity of life, they might not have gone to the strip show and listened harder to the preacher. I very much agree with you that this is more the norm in the West than the exception. I see the Church needing severe persecution in the West to weed out the hypocrites, strengthen our commitment and allow people to see what Christ is really like
Yes, it is still disobedience and wrong to sin, but sin itself is not the problem, since it is only unforgiven sins which are the problem.
All mature adults’ sin, which is sad and God does not like it, but it is needed for the unbeliever to fulfill his/her earthly objective. Briefly: The only way for humans to obtain Godly type Love and thus become like God Himself, who is Love, and be happy in heaven is by what Jesus taught us in (Luke 7 “…he who is forgiven much Loves much…”), so if we understand and accept forgiveness for an unbelievable huge debt created by sin, we will automatically obtain an unbelievable huge Love (Godly type Love). But, as you can see this requires the unbeliever to sin.
As a chemist myself: All I have heard and seen is the fact, “The more we know the more we realize we do not know”. It is always a lot more complex than we thought it was, so how can you put your faith in science? As a chemist, I cannot even imagine how chemicals on their own would come together to form life, even under very controlled conditions in a lab, let along naturally. That is just not the way chemicals work.
Think about this for a moment:
Something has always existed, even if you want to came nothing, “something”.
This “something” seems to include at least: time, space and energy (matter coming from energy).
We know intelligence exists since we are intelligent beings and intelligence can increase with time.
We also know it would be easier for time, space, energy, matter and intelligence to make intelligence, then it would be for just time, space, energy and matter to make intelligence, since adding intelligence is a real benefit in the creation of intelligence, which humans have or seem to be on their way to making intelligence (depending on how you define intelligence).
If there is an infinite amount of time prior to humans coming on the scene and intelligence can come from time, space, energy and matter then we would not be the first intelligence to come about,
so is it more likely: we were made from just time, space, energy and matter or are we also the product of a former intelligence?
You might have played simulation games, which are becoming more realistic all the time, but who can proof we are not all part of a simulation? I am not saying space, time, and matter do not exist, but could that all be just a simulation for our “existence”? It would not even take a day for God to throw a turn on switch. How hard would it be to have a miracle happen to your simulated person?
Not in the Hebrew Bible.You would need to know the purpose of the miracles. Most of the time they were used to point the people towards Christ. Other times to confirm the truth of who Christ Jesus was.
Maybe it is evidence that Atheists and Agnostics have developed stronger critical thinking skills and do not accept every proposition they encounter regarding religion.Born Again Believers don't ask these questions, why do you suppose that is?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?