Thanks for your insightful thoughts. Yes, miracles are outside the scope of history so they cannot be evaluated historically. But I think it’s evident that people in Jesus’ day believed miracles occurred and that is within the scope of history. As you point out, there were other “miracle” workers in Jesus’ day who performed “miracles” many believed in. So to me the issue is what is the meaning of miracles many people believed in. In Jesus’ case, they meant that those believers thought he had divine powers and this proved that he was divine, or the Son of God, or the Son of Man or something similar.
The same miracles happen today. Miracles spread by word of mouth, complete nonsense but are equal to levitating rocks and talking dogs in temples.
Modern day apocryphals.
A lady I worked with and I were taking a break out on the picnic table outside our workplace and she was telling’ me that in her little church, they were passing out little cups of wine.
They realized they were not going to have enough by the time it got to the people in the pews in the back row. But when the plate with the little wine cups got back to the back, somehow more little cups appeared on the plate and everyone got some wine!
She was serious.
Then my ex-girlfriend telling me that her sons cancer was gotten rid of by a divine miracle.
She knew full well she was talking to a guy whose wife died from brain cancer. Her son was chosen for a miracle that was not available for my wife.
Thats people for you.
** you do not have permission to see this link ** said
Does anyone know how common “miracles” were in Jesus’ day? I’m trying to ascertain if Jesus’ miracles were something rare or new, or if miracles were more common in those days. For me, if miracles (in whatever way you understand them) were more common, it would make Jesus’ use of them more understandable and less of a big deal as we see them today. So, if Jesus’ practice of miracles was something other religious practitioners did, or other “magicians” did, ,or other sears or healers did, they would be more understandable and less subject to controversy or dispute.Thanks for any help.
Rick Roeder
I began to think that the word “miracle” was a word we were injected with by the Roman Catholic Church hierarchical wordsmiths. A “miracle” can be explained scientifically as a natural phenomenon, i.e., cause and effect, when using the right method. However, the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy set up leverage, giving itself authority over in this world. The hierarchy decides if a person is a saint and had supernatural help. The word “supernatural” itself, to me, is suspect, in that everything is natural and is governed by laws that form our reality.
You are circling in on it when you say: “So, if Jesus’ practice of miracles was something other religious practitioners did, or other “magicians” did, or other seers or healers did, they would be more understandable…” Healing was not common in Christ’s day, nor is it common in our day. Christ had discovered a method, and probably brought even more understanding by doing his own research, that was even known by his particular sect, the Nazoraeans, IMO.
Divining is a way of asking questions and getting answers. It was an ancient method that, when it’s rules are understood, is used for healing. The method was known in Egypt and Mesopotamia, in fact, throughout the ancient world. But it was kept highly secret. Healing didn’t exactly go over well with the religious or government hierarchies of Christ’s day because their purpose was to control humanity rather than free humanity. The word “magician” comes from the word Magi…wise men. They were diviners, and could predict when a great soul would return. They could “divine” or ascertain where on earth and when this soul would be born using divination, i.e., asking question, getting answers. They used the north polar star as their primary director to extrapolate and to navigate over desert from their country, to Jerusalem, just like the ancient Hawaiians used the stars to navigate over vast distances of ocean using no instruments, just the stars, to their destination.
The Roman Catholic bible demonizes the word “divination” and the people who use it. “Diviners” is a much misunderstood concept even today. I certainly agree that if the ancient methods were known (which Paul called “mysteries”) everybody would be doing “miracles” and the world would change.
The question as it is expressed presupposes that there is some method that could be used to differentiate between a claimed miracle and the actual occurrence of what is traditionally meant by the word “miracle”.
If ancient text “A” says “The daughter of the prince was blind but after the court magician shook a chicken bone over her eyes while chanting a secret spell, her sight was restored.” How could anyone objectively verify if the miracle occurred or not? Would you accept it just because the ancient text claims it to be so?
But there is an even larger question to be answered – “How would you know a genuine miracle if you saw one?“
Thought experiment:
Here is a video of a man walking on water.
Would you accept it as a miracle?
Compare the “evidence” for this event against any evidence claimed for ancient miracles.
In this instance:
1. There are multiple people who witnessed the event.
2. Most, if not all, of these witnesses are still living
3. We have a digital video record of the event.
4. The video recording is from multiple angles using multiple cameras.
5. The event occurred outdoors in bright daylight.
6. The event was in a public space.
7. You can see the astonishment of the witnesses as they see the event occur.
8. You can hear the audio of the reactions of the witnesses to the event.
9. With so many witnesses present, do you not think that at least a few of them would see if trickery was being used?
If you would not accept this event as a miracle, then what criteria do you propose that would allow an event reported in an ancient text written by an unknown author to be accepted as miraculous that would also eliminate this event as an authentic miracle?
When anyone tells me, that he saw a dead man restored to life, I immediately consider with myself, whether it be more probable, that this person should either deceive or be deceived, or that the fact, which he relates, should really have happened. I weigh the one miracle against the other; and according to the superiority, which I discover, I pronounce my decision, and always reject the greater miracle. If the falsehood of his testimony would be more miraculous, than the event which he relates; then, and not till then, can he pretend to command my belief or opinion. – David Hume
I have yet to come across a story of a miracle where it’s not more probable that deceit or mistake was more probable. Either that, or there’s just not enough information to say.
In the Angel video, some of the witnesses do things to enhance the credibility of the claim, like swimming under him or moving in front of him, which they do suddenly and without hesitation and without checking if there is in fact anything supporting him that they will hit. They know that there is nothing in the way at the predesignated spots. But the real giveaway is that he is not walking on the water, which is moving up and down while he is not. He is stepping on something stationary and transparent that is in the water, which requires stepping carefully, as he does, because it is not continuous. If he had danced around on top of the water not in a straight line including where other people had been a moment before, I would be more impressed.
When Dynamo walked on the Thames, the rise and fall of the water with no change in his foot level was much more obvious than in a little pool. His shills were the two kayaks that pass by right near the shore, ridiculously close together (so as to avoid hitting the supports). One of them either hits the edge of a support or swerves to avoid it, coming very close to the other kayak.
I once knew a person, a part time professional magician, who could do amazing things with no apparent preparation. One of them was to come to your home and levitate his assistant right in front of you. I know how it is done but will not tell. He also taught me some really terrific card tricks. Too bad I no longer have the finger dexterity to pull off the better ones.
Miracles? Show me. But it better be good.
Such doubt! You even question the reliability of the witnesses in the video. Could it be that you have an anti-supernatural bias? Or maybe you just can’t see the miracle because you were not predestined to be among the elect of Criss Angel fans!
I will beseech the demiurge that your eyes be opened so that you can find the truth.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)