Jesus' imperfect miracles.

[Vicki Q]

Those things were "signs"...they weren't intended to be permanent "fixes".

Since none of us ever saw those "signs" that Jesus supposedly did there's no reason to believe that he did them.

Firstly, it is important to distinguish between signs and miracles. The latter are a post-enlightenment innovation in which God intervenes in a mechanistic universe, breaking “The Rules of Nature”. Since scientific understanding has moved on, and theology shoulda never went there, we need to drop them as a framework for discussion.

The biblical concept of signs ('works of power' 'things we would not normally expect') is very different. Things happen within the Rules Of Nature which point us towards a better understanding of it. They point to a power not interfering with nature, but enabling it to be as it should be.

As to whether we should believe there is sufficient evidence for a change in our worldview to include God, that's a massive question. Standard historical methods, in particular multiple use of sources and forms, and the criteria of coherence, make it virtually impossible that all Gospel signs were totally made up.


Which leads to the vital question of what these people who lived cheek by jowl with Jesus actually saw.