Jesus Could Have Walked on Ice, Scientist Says

[Midnightrider]

I pretty much know how they both work. The are still both selfish desires.

he'll never see it, you know "Blind Faith" emphasis on the Blind part.

speaking of miracles, did anyone see dateline the other night where the author was saying that he believed Jesus didn't die on the cross, and he supported it with quotes from the bible? His argument was that jesus was taken down before he died, and that his resurection was nothing more than him regaining his strength.

 

[crabcake]

Interesting. So quoting from the Bible means nothing to you. OK. The Bible and its message has withstood the test of time. The Pentateuch has been around for about 5000 - 6000 years and the account of Jesus has been believed for more than 2000 years. People from the time Jesus walked on this earth to this day have and are willing to die for their belief. The falling away of believers and the increase in those that will not believe are prophesied in the Bible as a sign of the last days. So whether you believe and accept God's way in this life makes the difference as to where you will spend eternity. But no matter whether you believe now or not, you will bend your knee before Jesus and acknowledge Him as Lord. The question is will He also be your Savior? Will you be on His right hand or His left?

I didn't say it meant nothing; I offered up a different theory in line with the article I posted. :shrug:

 

[2ndAmendment]

I didn't say it meant nothing; I offered up a different theory in line with the article I posted. :shrug:

Couldn't tell from this.

Or it means the Bible (and subsequently what you quoted from it) is full of balogna.

 

[crabcake]

Couldn't tell from this.

theory n 1: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory" 2: a tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices" [syn: hypothesis, possibility] 3: a belief that can guide behavior; "the architect has a theory that more is less"; "they killed him on the theory that dead men tell no tales".


If you're going to be so literal, don't skip over key words.

 

[Tonio]

I just want to step in and play "devil's advocate" for a moment. The term "sinners", as 2A and other Christians use it, is in reference to everyone, themselves included. The difference in a Christian and non-Christian is in part that a Christian realizes that everyone, himself included, is a sinner. Obviously, no one is perfect. A non-Christian believes that as long as they live a good life, they are not a sinner.

I can appreciate that. My point is, why does a believer in any religion have to include other people in his or her concept of deity and the afterlife? Why does the believer desperately want others to change their beliefs? Why isn't it enough that the believer regards himself or herself as a sinner? Why isn't it enough for the believer to be on his or her personal spiritual path? In my view, when a believer labels others as sinners, the believer implies that others are not worthy or not good enough. Not in the eyes of the believer's God, but in the eyes of the believer. I can't speak for anyone else, but I hate being told what to believe and what not to believe.

 

[Tonio]

Not exactly, I was thinking more along the lines of these scientists merely posing the theory that Jesus used science to make at least some of his miracles. Doesn't mean that he isn't still the son of God.

Great point. That's part of what I was trying to say. I look at the miracles as separate phenomena from the question of deity. In my view, the existence of deity or Jesus being the son of God can never be proven or disproven scientifically.

 

[supersurfer]

My point is, why does a believer in any religion have to include other people in his or her concept of deity and the afterlife? Why does the believer desperately want others to change their beliefs? Why isn't it enough that the believer regards himself or herself as a sinner? Why isn't it enough for the believer to be on his or her personal spiritual path? In my view, when a believer labels others as sinners, the believer implies that others are not worthy or not good enough. Not in the eyes of the believer's God, but in the eyes of the believer. I can't speak for anyone else, but I hate being told what to believe and what not to believe.

Christians are commanded in the Bible to take their message to the world. You know, the whole "Go into the world and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost".

 

[dems4me]

Christians are commanded in the Bible to take their message to the world. You know, the whole "Go into the world and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost".

I don't know that its meant for everyone, that may be out of context. :shrug: I tried it and it just turned people off of the Bible. I try by example, but that doesn't work either. When I started out in this quest, I didn't have the gift of tolerence, patience or understanding and was flat out told by my spiratual mentor very kindly that I needed to attract flies with honey and instead I was literally smacking them upside the head with the Bible. I get soo heated up over it and if they don't understand I start cursing them and calling them every name in the book and verbally tearing them in two. (That didn't work either.)
I pray about it though, but sometimes I think I'm just not a good messenger so I try not to preach If someone asks, then I'll glady share my faith, if not then I don't.

 

[Midnightrider]

Great point. That's part of what I was trying to say. I look at the miracles as separate phenomena from the question of deity. In my view, the existence of deity or Jesus being the son of God can never be proven or disproven scientifically.

I see the issues as separate as well. I find some of the scientific explanations of the miracles to be very compelling, and some that aren't so. But i wouldn't tie my believe, or lack there of, in jesus to wether or not he actually turned water into wine, or walked on the water.
I mean, i'm sure that David Blaine could walk on water, or appear to turn water into wine, but it wouldn't make him a diety.

 

[Bustem' Down]

I don't see why it just can't be metaphores. Jesus walking on water as a metaphore for something else doesn't change anything of his teachings.

 

[Toxick]

Why can't evangelists just be satisfied with their own beliefs? Why can't they just leave everyone else alone?

I dunno - why do militant atheists come into a religious group and try and stir up crap? Why can't they just be satisfied with their own beliefs? Why can't they just leave everyone else alone?

 

[Bustem' Down]

I dunno - why do militant atheists come into a religious group and try and stir up crap? Why can't they just be satisfied with their own beliefs? Why can't they just leave everyone else alone?

If this was posted in Chit Chat people with faith would go there and stir things up. It's one of the things about faith, people who believe and people who don't will argue with each other because each thinks that thier way of living is better. Always has been, always will.

 

[Toxick]

the existence of deity or Jesus being the son of God can never be proven or disproven scientifically.

It could have been disproven.

The Romans could have stopped the progression of Christiantity before it ever got out of Jerusalem, if they could have produced a body.

The entire phenomemon of Christianity stands or falls on one single specific event.

That one single specific event was the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. If that single event could have been disproven - which the Romans tried to do, and failed - then you could take everything that Jesus ever said and use it to stuff fortune-cookies, and it matters not a whit if Jesus walked on water or ice.

 

[Toxick]

who believe and people who don't will argue with each other because each thinks that thier way of living is better. Always has been, always will.

You see that black dot disappearing over the horizon? There goes the point.

 

[Bustem' Down]

It could have been disproven.

The Romans could have stopped the progression of Christiantity before it ever got out of Jerusalem, if they could have produced a body.

The entire phenomemon of Christianity stands or falls on one single specific event.

That one single specific event was the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. If that single event could have been disproven - which the Romans tried to do, and failed - then you could take everything that Jesus ever said and use it to stuff fortune-cookies, and it matters not a whit if Jesus walked on water or ice.

That and the Council of Nicea agreed by popular vote to deify Jesus. If there had been more Bishops that did not agree on the divinity of Christ, it could have swung the other way.

 

[Bustem' Down]

You see that black dot disappearing over the horizon? There goes the point.

Oh yes, I know. I think the whole thing is rather silly. I have never once tried to convert anyone to atheism.

 

[Bustem' Down]

I take that back, once I tried to convert a girlfriend because she was real religious and kept trying to take me to church, which I didn't want to do. It was dumb and it didn't work. I'm a little older and wiser now I guess.

 

[Toxick]

That and the Council of Nicea agreed by popular vote to deify Jesus.

No,that happened 300 years later and it doesn't really have anything to do with anything that I said.

 

[Bustem' Down]

No,that happened 300 years later and it doesn't really have anything to do with anything that I said.

Your right, my bad. I just got the wrong impression of your post. Try to ignore it.

 

[Toxick]

I have never once tried to convert anyone to atheism.

I've likewise never tried to convert anyone to Christianity.


There are proselytizers on both sides. For some reason the Christian ones seem to be considered 'evil' while the other ones are "just pointing out the obvious".