It's (NOT) a miracle!

[Abaddon_ire]

ah modern miracles, they seem only true when there is no evidence but a lot of lying involved

Why do athiests have a habit of making up arguments and then proceed to debunk the argument that only they themselves have made?

Stop making strawman arguments. It is merely a response in kind. If you can make up any random baloney then so can anyone else.

To answer the question of why isn't anyone walking on water, or multiplying bread and fish? Last I looked those miracles were literally preformed by God himself, any of you see Jesus walking around?

And that is consilient with god-jesus never existing. You claim jebus is present in your life every waking moment. Then you volte-face and ask why anyone would derogate such a claim because you never made it. Do you not see how idiotic that is?

---

Yeah, Jesus keeps missing the date(s) given for his return(s) therefore no one has seen him walking around... on water or on land.

Slightly unfair. Sure the JW crowd made such claims, and it is hilarious to watch the inevitable squirming and apologetics for the latest fail, but those are not the claims of most christians, just an unhappy, disappointed few. The rest simply ignore the inevitable. The rest go this wise. According to their magic books, apocalypse happened 2,000 years ago. Nobody seems to have noticed. And on and on. It quickly descends into post hoc rationalisation of the facts on the ground.

[fredd bear]

[bennyboy]

Why do athiests have a habit of making up arguments and then proceed to debunk the argument that only they themselves have made?
To answer the question of why isn't anyone walking on water, or multiplying bread and fish? Last I looked those miracles were literally preformed by God himself, any of you see Jesus walking around?

Let me get this straight. God, the all-present, all-powerful God, shows up and does a few parlor tricks, promises to come back some day, and then. . . nothing? It seems infinitely more likely to me that none of that happened at all, and that the reason it hasn't happened since then is that it can't happen-- cuz, you know, physics.

And another thing-- why were all the miracles things that David Blaine could do? Why didn't God just do something like "See the moon? Now, it's a melon. Now it's a dragon. Now it's the moon again. See that mountain? Watch me as I powerfully move it around with my Godly powers of Awesomeness!"

[awty]

Why do athiests have a habit of making up arguments and then proceed to debunk the argument that only they themselves have made?

Stop making strawman arguments. It is merely a response in kind. If you can make up any random baloney then so can anyone else.

To answer the question of why isn't anyone walking on water, or multiplying bread and fish? Last I looked those miracles were literally preformed by God himself, any of you see Jesus walking around?

And that is consilient with god-jesus never existing. You claim jebus is present in your life every waking moment. Then you volte-face and ask why anyone would derogate such a claim because you never made it. Do you not see how idiotic that is?

---

Yeah, Jesus keeps missing the date(s) given for his return(s) therefore no one has seen him walking around... on water or on land.

Slightly unfair. Sure the JW crowd made such claims, and it is hilarious to watch the inevitable squirming and apologetics for the latest fail, but those are not the claims of most christians, just an unhappy, disappointed few. The rest simply ignore the inevitable. The rest go this wise. According to their magic books, apocalypse happened 2,000 years ago. Nobody seems to have noticed. And on and on. It quickly descends into post hoc rationalisation of the facts on the ground.

Slightly unfair and only the JWs have made this claim?  That's slightly not true.

[Huggy Bear]

Why do athiests have a habit of making up arguments and then proceed to debunk the argument that only they themselves have made?
To answer the question of why isn't anyone walking on water, or multiplying bread and fish? Last I looked those miracles were literally preformed by God himself, any of you see Jesus walking around?

That's not really a good argument in favour of miracles.  I can imagine plenty of miracles that God could perform without Jesus having to be physically  present.

To take the two you mention, if Jesus can feed a multitude with a few fish and some bread, why haven't modern miracles been reported of large amounts of food suddenly appearing to feed the hungry?  If Jesus can walk on water, why haven't we read about  God miracle-ing that same ability into people trying to save a drowning child? 


Boru

The act of multiplying the bread and fish is an act of creation and is something only God can do, the only other person in the bible that had done such an act was Moses, yet God had made Moses a 'god'.

And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet. - Exodus 7:1

If you recall, Pharaohs magicians could preform almost every miracle that Moses did except for when Moses turned all the dust in Egypt into Gnats.

Exodus 8:16-19
Then the Lord said to Moses, “Tell Aaron, ‘Stretch out your staff and strike the dust of the ground,’ and throughout the land of Egypt the dust will become gnats.” They did this, and when Aaron stretched out his hand with the staff and struck the dust of the ground, gnats came on people and animals. All the dust throughout the land of Egypt became gnats. But when the magicians tried to produce gnats by their secret arts, they could not.

Since the gnats were on people and animals everywhere, the magicians said to Pharaoh, “This is the finger of God.”

If you want to insist that Jesus be corporeally present for miracles to occur, all well and good - you've got a basic right to believe whatever you like. It seems, however, that such a requirement severely limits the power of God. Or, is it your contention that miracles ended with the Ascension? If so, same objection.

What you don't seem to be factoring in is the faith requirement. So the question shouldn't be "why aren't there any miracles?", the question should be "why aren't there any people with enough faith?". As we get further and further away from the events in the scripture it becomes harder and harder to believe, hence why Jesus asked the question:

Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth? - Luke 18:8

[Fake Messiah]

[The Grand Nudger]

That's not really a good argument in favour of miracles.  I can imagine plenty of miracles that God could perform without Jesus having to be physically  present.

To take the two you mention, if Jesus can feed a multitude with a few fish and some bread, why haven't modern miracles been reported of large amounts of food suddenly appearing to feed the hungry?  If Jesus can walk on water, why haven't we read about  God miracle-ing that same ability into people trying to save a drowning child? 


Boru

The act of multiplying the bread and fish is an act of creation 

No....lol?  It's an "act" of confirming base theology and the the apostolic tradition..both things that the authors of those stories were desperate to reinforce.   It paid their bills.

Tell a story, rattle a cup.

[Fake Messiah]

So the question shouldn't be "why aren't there any miracles?", the question should be "why aren't there any people with enough faith?".

Luke 17:6
`If you had faith as a grain of mustard seed, you could say to this sycamine tree, "Be uprooted and planted in the sea!"

Indeed, since such a thing is plainly never going to happen, you can see how little faith any one will ever have.

The act of multiplying the bread and fish is an act of creation 

No....lol?  It's an "act" of confirming base theology and the the apostolic tradition..both things that the authors of those stories were desperate to reinforce.   It paid their bills.

Tell a story, rattle a cup.

Act of Jesus multiplying bread and fish is an act of scribe that wrote Mark reworking story of Elisha multiplying food.

2 Kings 4:42-44
"A man came from Baal-shalishah, bringing the man of God bread of the firstfruits, twenty loaves of barley, and fresh ears of grain in his sack. And Elisha said, `Give to the men, that they may eat.' But his servant said, `How am Ito set this before a hundred men?' So he repeated, `Give them to the men, that they may eat, for thus says Yahve: "They shall eat and have some left."' So he set it before them, and they ate, and had some left, according to the word of Yahve."

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That's not really a good argument in favour of miracles.  I can imagine plenty of miracles that God could perform without Jesus having to be physically  present.

To take the two you mention, if Jesus can feed a multitude with a few fish and some bread, why haven't modern miracles been reported of large amounts of food suddenly appearing to feed the hungry?  If Jesus can walk on water, why haven't we read about  God miracle-ing that same ability into people trying to save a drowning child? 


Boru

The act of multiplying the bread and fish is an act of creation and is something only God can do, the only other person in the bible that had done such an act was Moses, yet God had made Moses a 'god'.

And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet. - Exodus 7:1

If you recall, Pharaohs magicians could preform almost every miracle that Moses did except for when Moses turned all the dust in Egypt into Gnats.

Exodus 8:16-19
Then the Lord said to Moses, “Tell Aaron, ‘Stretch out your staff and strike the dust of the ground,’ and throughout the land of Egypt the dust will become gnats.” They did this, and when Aaron stretched out his hand with the staff and struck the dust of the ground, gnats came on people and animals. All the dust throughout the land of Egypt became gnats. But when the magicians tried to produce gnats by their secret arts, they could not.

Since the gnats were on people and animals everywhere, the magicians said to Pharaoh, “This is the finger of God.”

If you want to insist that Jesus be corporeally present for miracles to occur, all well and good - you've got a basic right to believe whatever you like.  It seems, however, that such a requirement severely limits the power of God. Or, is it your contention that miracles ended with the Ascension?  If so, same objection.

What you don't seem to be factoring in is the faith requirement. So the question shouldn't be "why aren't there any miracles?", the question should be "why aren't there any people with enough faith?". As we get further and further away from the events in the scripture it becomes harder and harder to believe, hence why Jesus asked the question:

Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth? - Luke 18:8

But (in the Bible, at least) people without faith - or at least without faith in the proper franchise - were witness to miracles, so faith hardly seems any more necessary for miracles to occur than does the physical presence of Jesus.

Nice try at moving the goalposts, though.

Boru