Miracles Cannot Violate Natural Law

[JacksBratt]

All that seems interesting to me, and I see how one can infer that Pharisees felt anger, but it might easily have been fear.

I am sure fear, embarrassment, jealousy, a threat to their posh lives, loss of authority..... all came into play.

I do not believe that they knew who Jesus was. This is based on the fact that if they did, they would have known that the killing of Him would only serve to fulfill the prophesy and prove His teachings to be true.

I would imagine that the high priests were quite furious with Joseph of Arimathea for giving Jesus his personal tomb, thus fulfilling a prophesy in that action.

 

[JacksBratt]

When I heard about walking on water, I thought about Jesus looking like a ghost. It sounds like a hallucination.

The boat left shore without Jesus. Later, while the boat was in the middle of the sea, Jesus walked up and got in the boat. No hallucination can do that. Peter even asked if he could walk out and Jesus told him to. Peter also walked on water and many forget that.

Storms stop. They are natural events.

So, this was just coincidence? A storm so violent that the disciples thought that they were going to die at sea, Jesus, sleeping. They wake Him and He commands the storm to stop and it does..... But, only due to impeccable timing on Jesus part? Doubt that.

Instantaneous cures do a lot to undermine credibility. It just never happens. People get sick. The go to there house. If they don't come out, the village elders burn the house.

Never happens. You are correct. That's why it was a miracle when Jesus did it.

Walking dead would also seem impossible, but I know about herbs that make people appear dead.

You are correct. They have compounds in Haiti that can cause a person to seem dead and be pronounced dead by a doctor.

However, the story states that he was so sick that they figured he would die. So much so that they sent for Jesus. This in not conducive of a person being administered a drug to bring them to a state of "vital signs absent".

He was deathly ill, died and was dead for several days.

Good examples though.

 

[AV1611VET]

Hey, neat.

Sorry.

I need to add something to one of my posts: a specific event.

Here's the correction:

Hey, neat.

Remember the 2004 Indonesian tsunami?

How's come those Indonesians and tourists didn't just drive across on dry ground to Malaysia then?

I guess they didn't know Hebrew very well, did they?

They must not have had access to Strong's Concordance either, eh?

Maybe they thought about it but, like A'Quila, scientists told them it's safe to go home?

 

[JacksBratt]

Cool pictures. Not sure if you are actually using them for an argument of just for the sake of showing a cool picture of creatures that weigh less than 2 pounds or so walking on plant leaves that contain air bladders to keep them on top of the water.

They are cool pictures. However, Christ was probably about 180 lbs and the sea was not covered in vegetation. Even so, sounds to me like there was a storm coming and the water was probably not as calm as these water fowl are experiencing.

 

[JacksBratt]

You are very good with google. Is Christ now a water strider?

Or maybe He was still as a pin?

Or they rolled out the carpet?

 

[JacksBratt]

Off the top of my head: Schizofrenia. Nobody knows what causes it, nore how to cure it.

There are plenty of unexplained deseases and causes of death.

Then there are those "seemingly impossible" accidents which are the result of plenty of factors resulting in as good as impossible odds of it happening. But then it happens anyway and causes pain, death and / or suffering.

There are spontanous cures of deseases with far better odds that are labeled "miracle" all the time.

Thanks, now I see what your are getting at. I think that supernatural events occur all the time. I understand that there is no known cause for some illnesses, however, this is, IMO different than the instantaneous curing of one.

Can you give an example of a "spontaneous cure of a disease with far better odds that are labeled as a miracle".

 

[AV1611VET]

Is Christ now a water strider?

Comparing a water strider to Christ walking on water is like comparing floating marshmallows to someone bowling on the surface of a swimming pool.

 

[JacksBratt]

Of course, sinking in water sounds like a natural event. We don't know the witness who recorded the event, so we don't know why the witness recorded what he or she recorded. The mention of Jesus looking like a ghost makes the description of the event sound like an eye-witness account.

From the scriptures, the disciples were there to witness the event and Mathew recorded it. It is also recorded in the book of Mark and John.

 

[Jimmy D]

From the scriptures, the disciples were there to witness the event and Mathew recorded it. It is also recorded in the book of Mark and John.

It's a stretch to call Matthew an eyewitness, was he also an eyewitness at Herod's court 'at that time'?

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's a stretch to call Matthew an eyewitness, was he also an eyewitness at Herod's court 'at that time'?

Also all of the Gospels are actually anonymous. The names given to them were not even attached until the second century at the earliest. There is no reason to believe that any of them are written by "eyewitnesses". I guess it makes the stories more palatable for some.

 

[AV1611VET]

Also all of the Gospels are actually anonymous.

Jesus wrote the Gospels ... ahead of time.

Isaiah 46:10a Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done,

 

[JacksBratt]

It's a stretch to call Matthew an eyewitness, was he also an eyewitness at Herod's court 'at that time'?

I don't remember Mathew being blind.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's a stretch to call Matthew an eyewitness, was he also an eyewitness at Herod's court 'at that time'?

Psalm 119:89 For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.

If it's settled in Heaven, then it's settled on earth; no matter who wrote it.

 

[Jimmy D]

I don't remember Mathew being blind.

I didn't say he was. It seems he was able to record a conversation Herod was having in his court on the same day though.

 

[JacksBratt]

I didn't say he was. It seems he was able to record a conversation Herod was having in his court on the same day though.

The same day? hmm, Can you show how you get that?

 

[JacksBratt]

Also all of the Gospels are actually anonymous. The names given to them were not even attached until the second century at the earliest. There is no reason to believe that any of them are written by "eyewitnesses". I guess it makes the stories more palatable for some.

I would beg to differ here...

Check out: https://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

It is finished with this statement:

If the critics of the Bible dismiss the New Testament as reliable information, then they must also dismiss the reliability of the writings of Plato, Aristotle, Caesar, Homer, and the other authors mentioned in the chart at the beginning of the paper. On the other hand, if the critics acknowledge the historicity and writings of those other individuals, then they must also retain the historicity and writings of the New Testament authors, after all, the evidence for the New Testament's reliability is far greater than the others. The Christian has substantially superior criteria for affirming the New Testament documents than he does for any other ancient writing. It is good evidence on which to base the trust in the reliability of the New Testament.

 

[Pagan]

From the scriptures, the disciples were there to witness the event and Mathew recorded it. It is also recorded in the book of Mark and John.

A rational view would require witnesses and a recognition that stories change with time. I don't know much about this subject, but a Christian friend of mine told me that John has a unique status as the only author of the the good news, who claims to have witnessed Jesus' ministry, so John must have been in the boat.

Seems to me that Christians who think of the Holy Spirit as the omniscient narrator, would not need witnesses.

 

[PsychoSarah]

What's your point?

Is there something I'm missing?

Does BC/AD point you to Buddhism?

Or Christian holidays, songs, iconography, slogans, bumper stickers, debates, programs, edifices, etc.?

Do they all point you somewhere other than to Jesus Christ?

The times that certain holidays associated with Christianity take place point to other religions, as well as some of the iconography. For example, if Christmas were to actually fall on a time around Jesus's birth, based on the bible, we should be celebrating it in the spring. But instead, it falls on a pagan holiday, and is celebrated exactly the same as that pagan holiday.

OT YHWH's behavior is reminiscent of the religions that came before it; an angry, jealous deity that interfered frequently with humans, often through patroning specific people. Greek gods did that a lot.

 

[SkyWriting]

You are very good with google.

College training in Library Science.

 

[SkyWriting]

OT YHWH's behavior is reminiscent of the religions that came before it; an angry, jealous deity that interfered frequently with humans, often through patroning specific people. Greek gods did that a lot.

This adds credibility. Thanks for noting.