What is the difference between . . .

[Zzyzx]

.
What is the difference between witch doctors, voodoo practitioners, and faith healers (including those described in Bible tales)?

[JehovahsWitness]

JW, according to the definitions you yourself provided, would it be incorrect of me to say that the Jesus Christ character of the New Testament is a witch doctor?

WITCH DOCTOR

: a professional worker of magic usually in a primitive society who often works to cure sickness
https://www.merriam-webster.com/diction ... h%20doctor

Yes that would indeed be incorrect to suggest Jesus as described in scripture could justifiably be classified as a witch doctor since there is no account where he is depicted as employing magic.

MAGIC

1a : the use of means (such as charms or spells) believed to have supernatural power over natural forces

b : magic rites or incantations

RELATED POSTS

What is spiritism?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 77#p955577

Why did Jesus perform miracles?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 41#p920941

[rikuoamero]

JW, according to the definitions you yourself provided, would it be incorrect of me to say that the Jesus Christ character of the New Testament is a witch doctor?

WITCH DOCTOR

: a professional worker of magic usually in a primitive society who often works to cure sickness
https://www.merriam-webster.com/diction ... h%20doctor

Yes that would indeed be incorrect to suggest Jesus as described in scripture could justifiably be classified as a with doctor since there is no account where he is depicted as employing magic.

MAGIC

1a : the use of means (such as charms or spells) believed to have supernatural power over natural forces

b : magic rites or incantations

Your answer is a non sequitur, in that it does not follow. Please pay attention to the question I asked.

JW, according to the definitions you yourself provided, would it be incorrect of me to say that the Jesus Christ character of the New Testament is a witch doctor?
At no point in the definitions that you wrote in Post#9, did you explain what you meant by the word 'magic'. It's only now, in the later post, that you say it would be wrong.

Anyway, please explain how one is able to discern that the Jesus Christ character did not use
1a the use of means (such as charms or spells) believed to have supernatural power over natural forces

b : magic rites or incantations

The language used for 1a indicates that the 'means' are not comprised solely of charms or spells...whatever they are. In fact...don't you now have to define those words as well? What about magic rites or incantations? What are those and did Jesus not use them?

Just so you understand where I'm coming from, imagine for me the follow hypothetical: I'm travelling along, and come to a crowd. The people in the crowd say there's healing going on. They say there's this fellow, Jesus Christ is his name. I go to the front to see what's exactly going on and I see stuff happening like the blind man from John 9.
I predict that eventually (sooner or later) you will have to admit there is no way to differentiate what the Jesus Christ character did, the source of his power, the means by which he did what he supposedly did, from those other people whom you believe to be using magic, which in your eyes is evil. That if there is a fellow who calls himself Jesus Christ standing on my left, and a fellow who calls himself Jesus Christ standing on my right, and both are doing what appear to be supernatural healings...that you will be unable to tell me a method by which to differentiate between them. After all, God is supernatural...beyond science, beyond our mortal ken. Well, so would the demons/devils whom JWs assert are behind magic.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 12 by rikuoamero]

I provided dictionary definition of the term WITCH DOCTOR , the word magic was right there in the original definition.
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 363#958363

There is no bible account that depicts Jesus as using "charms, spells or (magic) rites or incantations (ie magic). Indeed as a Jew he would have been under the Mosaic law that strictly prohibited such things.

DEUTERONOMY 18:10-12



“There should not be found in you anyone who ... employs divination, anyone practicing magic, anyone who looks for omens, a sorcerer, anyone binding others with a spell, anyone who consults a spirit medium or a fortune-teller, or anyone who inquires of the dead. For whoever does these things is detestable to Jehovah.� - NWT

INCANTATION

Definition of incantation
: a use of spells or verbal charms spoken or sung as a part of a ritual of magic

JW

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 13 by JehovahsWitness]

I provided dictionary definition of the term WITCH DOCTOR , the word magic was right there in the original definition.

I agree and that's the problem. My question, I even retyped it and put the important part in bold, was asking you as per the definitions you gave in Post 9. In Post 9, you did NOT define what magic is.

There is no bible account that depicts Jesus as using "charms, spells or (magic) rites or incantations (ie magic).

Then please explain the situation such as John 9. Please define for us what a "charm, spell, magic rite or incantation is", such that you can then with justification say that Jesus did NOT do or use any of them.

Indeed as a Jew he would have been under the Mosaic law that strictly prohibited such things.

Wasn't this one of the things that got him into hot water with the Jewish priests? They saw him doing supernatural healings and them leaping to the conclusion that he's violating Mosaic law? Was this charge wrong?
Have you attempted my hypothetical?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 14 by rikuoamero]

I am not your dictionary, if you don't know what any of the words in the definitions I have provided mean, feel free to avail yourself of one of the many online dictionaries available. If you are arguing that anything in John 9 accurately fits said definitions feel free to present arguments to support such a conclusion.

I will certainly consider responding if you do.

JW

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 15 by JehovahsWitness]


So the person who started out on this thread literally quoting the dictionary...now chafes at the idea of quoting the dictionary? Have you already looked up what that website says about magic and realised you can't actually exclude the Jesus Christ character?

[PinSeeker]

[Replying to post 14 by rikuoamero]

I am not your dictionary, if you don't know what any of the words in the definitions I have provided mean, feel free to avail yourself of one of the many online dictionaries available. If you are arguing that anything in John 9 accurately fits said definitions feel free to present arguments to support such a conclusion.

I will certainly consider responding if you do.

JW

Let me see if I can help, JW. I have no confidence that those whom you are debating here will buy this, but here goes:

If anyone wants to define 'magic' as making something happen, then I'm good with him or her attributing that to Jesus. But that's a silly interpretation of 'magic' -- in that sense, we're all magicians. Really, the difference is whether that "something" that has been caused to happen is real or illusory:

* With witch doctors, voodoo practitioners, and even faith healers -- magicians all -- their results are illusory; most magicians (provided they are honest and sane, will even tell you that.

* With Jesus, His results were (and are) not illusory but real/true and lasting. One may argue with that, but that's mere opinion.

[1213]

For fifty years a million dollars was offered to anyone who could demonstrate paranormal ability (presumably including witching and healing). No success = 1000, success = 0.

I don’t think it is possible to prove any “paranormal� thing, because when “paranormal� is understood, it becomes normal.

[William]

[Replying to post 17 by PinSeeker]

* With Jesus, His results were (and are) not illusory but real/true and lasting.

"One may argue with that, but that's mere opinion."

Jesus isn't concerned in the least whether you believe in the stories of him to do with the magic he is attributed with doing, or whether anyone believes it was illusion or real.

Illusion remains real as long as we do not know how the trick was performed. The miraculous appears to be something he used as a means to get peoples attention, so that the real magic of his words of peace and love might find a place to germinate and grow.

That was then and this is now.

There are no real people performing any miraculous magic in an environment where it can be studied and therefore 'illusion' is the better way to describe any of the claims which cannot subject themselves to scrutiny, those performing the magic - choosing rather - to have their secrets remain hidden.

[Zzyzx]

.

For fifty years a million dollars was offered to anyone who could demonstrate paranormal ability (presumably including witching and healing). No success = 1000, success = 0.

I don’t think it is possible to prove any “paranormal� thing, because when “paranormal� is understood, it becomes normal.

Reading carefully, "demonstrate paranormal ability" does NOT mean the same as paranormal "is understood".

It means, instead, that the ability has been demonstrated without tricks and illusions.