Jesus and Miracles

[FallentoReason]

...do you literally mean that a supernatural event could be explained such that there's no violation of nature, and thus there's a naturalistic explanation *of a supernatural event*?

I cannot speak for Fr0d0, but I can see that many miraculous events could be both natural and providential. For example, God times the opening of a sinkhole with Joshua blowing a horn. Or a shower of meteorites strike Sodom and light the town on fire, etc.

Did the "timing" of the sinkhole have anything to do with underground pressures shifting so as to form a sinkhole just like any other sinkhole in the world? Were the meteorites an unlucky coincidence of collisions in outer space which led to those meteorites having a velocity vector such that in t hours/years/decades they were going to bombard that particular strip of earth?

Where along the line of causal relations does the next natural event N happen as a consequence of supernatural event S i.e. where along the line does God stick his hand into the universe? Since you and I believe *every* event to be naturally explainable (as far as I'm concerned) then it means the answer to the above must be "God interfered *indirectly* when he set the universe in motion". If we're still on the same page, then doesn't that mean that certain people such as the examples you gave were deterministically doomed?

If you were to say that God made it rain today, would that be synonymous with saying that meteorologists have noticed over the last 48 hours that a storm was brewing and the chances of rain were extremely high today?

Sure. Why not. The universe behaves in a certain way. Modern science began as a means for understanding how God governs the universe through the natural world.

So is this also the stuff of miracles? If so, then I finally understand what.. well.. what you personally mean Chad by a "miracle". Then I would have to agree (with what fr0d0 originally said in another thread) that it's a matter of faith to believe that a natural process is the "cause" of a supernatural entity. I say "cause" with 66 and 99 because the event is a *closed* event governed directly by how the universe works, as understood by science. But of course we're supposing that God created this universe which means that in a deterministic sort of way, God's responsible. Either way, I don't think this is a sensible application of faith. I don't see any reason to think that a particular "miracle" of nature is the doing of a supernatural agent any more than you think it's the doing of Allah.

---

I take it your answer is then A, which would be the more plausible out of the two.

Then again, you might believe in the traditional miracle where the supernatural violates nature.

I asked a simple question to find out what grounds we can argue on so I could make a choice to debate, that's all, and what happens the same old childish nonsense.

GC

My apologies for giving a serious answer before...?

I'm leaving it up to you. I want to hear your account of what a miracle is and how exactly it plays out in reality.

[fr0d0]

I didn't read past this epic fail.

It depends on how you define natural? Rising from the dead is certainly not normal. How do you know that the Providential order does not include a means of resurrection that operates under His rational governance of reality?

Personally I do not belief miracles upset the order of the universe. Instead I think they expand our notion of the possible.

It depends how you define miracles. Everything is a miracle, if you are in awe of it.

If you state that the natural order IS God, that this is what he set in motion, then this dismisses an interventionalist God, and I don't think that it's correct. I hope I understand you correctly.

---

Supernatural events cannot be proved to be supernatural.

Because our means of proving things are through natural ways. So far so good?

Good

If they really are supernatural, you will always be able to doubt that they are.

Only if it acts identically to natural phenomena, which is what you've explicitly said before. So far so good?

Bad

Supernatural acts can always be explained away naturally, but that doesn't mean that they actually were natural acts. It's possible to construct a natural cause in explanation that doesn't acknowledge the actual cause.

(I'm going to have to respond to your post in parts because it'd be too difficult to do otherwise on my phone)

[fr0d0]

I understand everything as coming from God. The miraculous is something extraordinary that follows biblical precedent.

God filled the tank with gas: supernatural event that supposedly has some meaning or we would dismiss it as not God sourced. Facts: the tank was empty, it's now full with no physical explanation. Along comes materialist who doesn't believe supernatural intervention. Person is deluded, they forgot that they had already filled up/they want to believe the car suddenly appeared to get heavier/ etc.

[freedomfromforum]

For those of you who believe that miracles are indistinguishable from natural processes (i.e. miracles can be *explained* naturally)

I didn't read past this epic fail.

Of course you didn't. When logic and reasoning crush emotional arguements, then those with the emotional arguements pick up their toys and scramble away from the playground in a huff, chanting; "La la la la la la - I'm not listening to you - la la la la la la"

[fr0d0]

Ok I think I'm done. If I carry on answering your misconceptions I think this only confuses things for you. It's why I've found it possible to only go so far with your previous questions. I'm not ignoring your questions. To answer them would mean that I would have to assume that the understanding that you base your questions on was correct.

---

Of course you didn't. When logic and reasoning crush emotional arguements, then those with the emotional arguements pick up their toys and scramble away from the playground in a huff, chanting; "La la la la la la - I'm not listening to you - la la la la la la" :lalala:

You have the most ironic username. Bravo!

[freedomfromforum]

You have the most ironic username. Bravo!

This post belongs in the "backhanded compliment" thread. You missed your calling. That, and my reasoning for choosing my username. But thanks for the compliment; oh wiat, you are poking fun at me. How mature - now scramble away.

[fr0d0]

Yeah I should have been more specific. You completely missed the point. Your freedom is born through blindness.

[freedomfromforum]

Yeah I should have been more specific. You completely missed the point. Your freedom is born through blindness.

Trolling much? You are highly predictable.

[fr0d0]

Yeah I should have been more specific. You completely missed the point. Your freedom is born through blindness.

Trolling much? You are highly predictable.

ok I admire your self critique

[Minimalist]

Shows how dumb Dever is, Joshua did not destroy Jericho.

Smile GC

AS seems to happen repeatedly G-C, you don't even read your own bullshit.

20 When the trumpets sounded, the army shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the men gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so everyone charged straight in, and they took the city. 21 They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

Joshua 6

It's distasteful to have to keep reminding you what is in your own stupid fucking book.

---

Yet, archaeology has shown that "joshua" is as phony as "god."

Quite the opposite...

Tell es-Sultan aka Jericho

Kathleen Kenyon determined that Jericho was destroyed c 1550 BC - long before any alleged "Joshua." Her work was borne out by radiocarbon testing in the mid 90's. Dever notes that, like other so-called biblical sites, namely Ai, Early and Middle Bronze Age sites were later reoccupied in the Iron Age after having been abandoned for centuries. Jericho was one such site.

Dever gives a catalog of these so-called biblical sites and notes that the various destruction layers - where they exist - are spread out over a period of two centuries. Joshua's blitzkrieg...like much of the rest of your fucking bible....is just a later fairy tale.

His book on the subject is called "Who Were The Early Israelites And Where Did They Come From." Dever likes long titles.