(October 23, 2014 at 10:01 am)jeroenymo Wrote: Another shot at the theistic view:
follow this analogy: if a hold a ball at shoulder height and you let it go, it drops to the ground.
<snip>
However, this doesnt take away that Jesus was the word of God, it justs binds him, just like all of us, to the laws of nature.
Apologies- it's been a while since your post, so I may not be giving you the chance to notice this.
I don't think you may be confusing effect with ontology. Gravity exists in that the scientific model used appears to be a reasonable summary law of observed data. God exists as a sentient entity.
Where we might agree to a degree is in the concept of miracle. Post-enlightenment debate has viewed miracle as God 'interfering in the normal laws on nature'. However the NT concept, aligning with modern science, is that these things occur within the 'laws of nature', but point us to a better understanding of what those laws are (i.e. pointing to God).
The problem with your last paragraph is that it runs up against history. Lay aside any claim to inspiration, and view the NT as a collection of biased documents seeking to use a partially remembered history to bolster its membership. And you still have a massive problem when normal historical analysis is done.
It is absolutely clear that Jesus contemporaries strongly believed that he did things for which there was and there remains no explanation within current understanding. And the rise of the Early Church with the beliefs that they had defies alternative historical explanation. The idea of Jesus teaching living on wouldn't, for example, explain why the disciples believed the general resurrection had been split into two parts, or why they believed the Kingdom of God had finally arrived.
