Posted on 02/28/2009 9:10:53 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
...
Unfortunately, many theologians have decided that claims made by the majority of scientists represent scientific “facts.” In turn, these “facts” represent ultimate truth, which must then be used to understand biblical teachings. However, the Bible contains numerous claims and events that are not going to be popularly accepted as “scientific.” Are these claims now unacceptable to Christians?
Scripture records the occurrence of numerous miracles performed by God. By definition, a miracle is an event not explainable by natural processes. Otherwise, it would hardly constitute a miracle. Are these miracles going to be accepted as “scientific?” What do these theologians propose we do with biblical miracles?...
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
All religions are hypotheses because, by there own definitions, they are faith-based, not based on empirical knowledge or proof. My statement is not the presentation of a system or a description of causal forces merely an unassailable observation. If I say a cat is black, I am not offering a reason for its color, simply an observation. There is nothing hypothetical about it.
It’s a history of believer in a hypothetical system of belief. Overlaying the existence of demonstrably existent historical facts and people onto a base of hypothetical belief doesn’t change the hypothetical foundation of the belief.
All those documented miracles were hypothetical?
yes
“All those miracles were hypothetical?”
“Yes.”
Try telling that to those born blind who could see. The lepers who were cleansed. There was a man lying by the Pool at Siloam who took up his bed and walked. How many hundreds drank the water that Jesus made wine? The mute spoke. Fevers were lifted. Lazarus, in particular, might chuck at the “hypothetical” resurrection from the dead the he enjoyed.
Finally, after Christ’s resurrection, he appeared to many eyewitnesses, and not hypothetically.
I don’t know how much more evidence you can have if you have many reputable eyewitnesses to events.
I can explain it for you; I cannot understand it for you.
I wonder, then, if you believe in the defeat of the Spanish Armada, the Battle of Hastings, the campaigns of Genghis Khan, the battles between Sparta and Athens, or the Ming Dynasty. There is nothing but eyewitness written history and some artifacts for some of these, just as for Christian recorded history. Yet we all accept the history as true.
“Any fair reading of the Gospels and other ancient sources (including Josephus) inexorably leads to the conclusion that Jesus was well known in his time as a healer and exorcist. The miracle stories are now treated seriously and are widely accepted by Jesus scholars as deriving from Jesus’ ministry. Several specialized studies have appeared in recent years, which conclude that Jesus did things that were viewed as ‘miracles’.” B.D. Chilton and C.A. Evans (eds.), Authenticating the Activities of Jesus, pp. 11-12 (NTTS, 28.2; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1998).
• “[T]he tradition that Jesus did perform exorcisms and healings (which may also have been exorcisms originally) is very strong.” R.H. Fuller, Interpreting the Miracles, p. 39.
• “[B]y far the deepest impression Jesus made upon his contemporaries was as an exorcist and a healer. . . . In any case he was not only believed to possess some quite special curative gifts but evidently, in some way or other he actually possessed them.” Michael Grant, An Historian’s Review of the Gospels, pp. 31, 35.
• “Yes, I think that Jesus probably did perform deeds that contemporaries viewed as miracles.” Paula Fredriksen, Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews, p. 114.
• “There is no doubt that Jesus worked miracles, healed the sick and cast out demons.” Gerd Theissen, The Miracle Stories of the Early Christian Tradition, p. 277.
• “In most miracle stories no explanation at all is given; Jesus simply speaks or acts and the miracle is done by his personal power. This trait probably reflects historical fact.” Morton Smith, Jesus the Magician, p. 101.
• “There is agreement on the basic facts: Jesus performed miracles, drew crowds and promised the kingdom to sinners.” E.P. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, p. 157.
• “Yes, we can be sure that Jesus performed real signs which were interpreted by his contemporaries as experiences of an extraordinary power.” H. Hendrickx, The Miracle Stories and the Synoptic Gospels, p. 22.
• “That Jesus performed deeds that were perceived as miracles by both him and his audience is difficult to doubt.” Witherington, The Christology of Jesus, page 155.
• “[W]e must be clear that Jesus’ contemporaries, both of those who became his followers and those who were determined not to become his followers, certainly regarded him as possessed of remarkable powers.” Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God , p. 187.
• “[T]he tradition of Jesus’ miracles has too many unusual features to be conveniently ascribed to conventional legend-mongering. Moreover, many of them contain details of precise reporting which is quite unlike the usual run of legends and is difficult to explain unless it derives from some historical recollection; and the gospels themselves show a remarkable restraint in their narratives which contrasts strangely with that delight in the miraculous for its own sake which normally characterizes the growth of legend.” A.E. Harvey, Jesus and the Constraints of History, p. 100.
BTW nothing in the story of the Spanish Armada and the rest of your citations ascribe a supernatural force to the events so I find historical records of them credible. The reports of Jesus that ascribe supernatural forces were reported by people who thought volcanoes erupted because Vulcan was upset. The difference should be plain but nothing in our exchanges so far convinces me that you can see that difference.
Well, there were not several different eyewitnesses who claimed to see Vulcan erupt the volcano.
Basically, as I understand you, you believe anything miraculous or supernatural is a de facto impossibility. No matter how many witnesses or whatever.
You will accept eyewitness accounts of events you find plausible.
You will not accept eyewitness accounts of events you find implausible.
I think that is a very closed minded position, but if you are happy with it, so be it.
I on the other hand have experienced a myriad of inexplicable and surreal happenings in my time, and recognize that there is more to this world that I can see with my own eyes. I have definitely seen God move in supernatural ways. I am sorry if you have not been able to see this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.