Matthew 9:5 ' Jesus didn't do miracles? '

[Masterblaster]

Hello

Matthew 9:5 For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk?

All the signs are there that this is a massive bluff by Matthew. Disagree ,if you like.
Why did he use an example of a physical incident to attempt to prove a metaphysical one.

I know that Jesus did neither miracle and this is how I know. Jesus failed miserably to change the ways of anyone around him. Surely that would have been the easiest miracle of the three?

Is the Jesus miracle thing an attempted con?


Come on, Christians, answer the question, why did Jesus fail to change the ways of the people , then and now?
(ps:none of the free-will apologies Please!)

Thanks

[Masterblaster]

Hello

'You can lead a horse to water, ...', and all that but here is a travelling preacher-healer who is now attributed with wiping invisible sins from invisible souls. This guy on this simple faith-healing incident, that did or did not happen, is being used within a theistic narrative , to unlock the gates of an invisible Heaven , in an invisible Realm?

Good work Matthew,....but that is some stretch of the imagination. The actions and contexts of the actual Jesus accounts are being augmented and embellished with symbolic significance, throughout the Gospels for the purpose of selling this big lie.

Despite this attempt at embriodery, the Human and Divine within the actual Jesus ,is never successfully stitched together.This leaves us with a tapestry of nonsense, held together with ficticious string... imho

It is no wonder that Judaism didn't buy it!

Thanks

[TRANSPONDER]

The whole thing about the reported miracles of Jesus is many -layered.

First off, I argue that the gospels are Christian fabrications with Jesus gradually moving from Paul's man - messiah bundled about the landscape by the Spirit to John's God on earth wearing the skin of Jesus like a transparent plastic mac.

Paul never mentions any of Jesus' miracles, not even the raising of Lazarus, but then neither do the synoptics mention that one. Xplanation - John invented it. Which is a shame as it would make a provable faked miracle IF it was true.

Which brings me to the next layer; supposing (and this is a less probable but still possible hypothesis) the miracles (the Signs) were true, then they work very well as faked miracles to impress the followers:

(1) water into wine (John only) could be a simple mistake giving Jesus the idea later on.
(2) healing at a distance (in two different places in yet another might discrepancy) where nobody sees it but it is claimed to happen later on.
(3) The daughter of Jairus, another Ruler (synaogue president) so it's the same fellow. This time a couple of trusted stooges are allowed upstairs to proclaim later to the crowd of dupes that Jairus' daughter was brought back from death or near death.
(4) blind bar -Timaeus, they know this guy, parked outside the gate of Jericho to hail Jesus as 'Son of David (which title he needs to validate when he assaults the Temple as liberating messiah) and having loudly announced that he is healed, he joins his mates on the journey to Jerusalem.
(5) Lazarus. An elaborate fraud set up long before. The Bethany bods know to send the note 'Lazarus is sick' to Peraea. Jesus waits two days, so there is no question that Lazarus is still alive. After some dialogue to convince the crowd of followers that Lazarus is already stinking the place out, Jesus calls Lazarus and he hops or walks out, none the worse but for half an hour in wrappings lying in Arimathea's tomb.

Yes, IF they were true, they would make more sense - indeed a jury would be convinced - if they were frauds. But the fact that none of the synoptics have heard of the raising of Lazarus (except possibly Luke who appears to have SOME knowledge of John, which is why he appears to borrow some things) which makes me reluctantly prefer the theory that John was actually an inventive scriptwriter.

So, as to miracles, I doubt that Jesus (whoever he really was) didn't do any of them, not even the canonical ones, letalone the hundreds of healings that the gospels airy claim.

[Masterblaster]

Hello TRANSPONDER

Thank You for your reply, ..I am almost leaving this place (as usual). Lazarus is the real give-away,...leave him to stew for a few days in a tomb, and create plausibility for Easter week. Funny that it wasn't needed within the Christian logic in the end as God, not Jesus ,raised Jesus. Were they proving that God could do it?

Lazarus was built up to, with the other , less dramatic, back from the dead incidents, as you rightly mention.
The early wine to water, sorry, water to wine at Cana, is useful as a probability prop for the last Supper and the whole bedrock of the Christian Eucharist, Mass, Consecration, thingy,....whatever it is?

If you want to believe all this stuff, then go ahead, ...people have put their faith in worse ,..but do not try to defend your belief with Biblical Gospel text that people like TRANSPONDER, can see through, from 10 miles away.

Thanks

[TRANSPONDER]

It does come down to Belief in the end. On the way, Christianity has thrived on ignorance (it even praises it in the Bible). I am astonished at how a fudged view of the Bible has been peddled - a composite view with all the awkward bit massaged together and the 'witness error' excuse overplayed like mad.

While the Nativity is a known contradiction (the 2nd census apologetic has been argued in a determined way that would flummox Judge Chutkin) people still rock along with a vague idea of the shepherds and wise men turning up at a stable with snow on the roof and a star hovering over it. And the other Biggie (resurrections) have had books trying to fiddle the contradictions together. And of course the death of Judas are easily combined, and the other contradictions waffled away on the taxicab fallacy (thanks to our new pal) mistaking the details doesn't mean it didn't happen.


And 'clean hands' is a legal principle, for all the genetic fallacy is wagged about. If the Gospel writers lie about one thing, why should we trust them on another? And it is as provable as the cetan sequence that One at least is fabricating their nativity, and neither really make sense.

But let me just check something....

Matthew 9.5 For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk?

Did Jesus do that miracle? The synoptics all say so, so it must be 'Original story', and that adds credibility,right?But then, if they all used the Synoptic Original it's just three (Mark is NOT the original) it is just repeating one story. But then, John confirms it. But his palsied person in not in Galilee, but in Jerusalem.

What is going on? Witness error with absolutely not answer here. It can only be answered two ways (dismissal or ignoring is not an Answer) They were two separate events. or the same claim was picked up by the original writers of those gospels (Synoptic and John) and used in two different ways.

Just as, in fact, John and the synoptics used the 'healing at a distance'. The evidence is there. They were not eyewitnesses but collectors of miracle -stories which were collated into two contradictory stories, and why the Experts, Scholars and Authorities of the Bible haven't seen what it as clear as mud for 2,000 years defeats me, unless (like most of our Bible apologists here) they didn't want to see it.

It explains everything. All the problems, pretty much. Why the synoptics never heard of the death of Lazarus, why John never heard of the the Transfiguration and why Mark has no sermon and nor has John. It was pretty much all made up.

Of course the Bible apologists will dismiss and ignore that an try to fiddle epistemology to excuse monumental, case - scuppering contradictions, but once the Open minded have realised the scam, they won't be fooled by it, ever again.

[Masterblaster]

Hello

It is hard to describe how frustrated I feel about this.
There is a genuine teaching for all mankind being suffocated in this freak show smoke and mirrors stuff about Jesus being God.

On a day, 16th April 2024, when BS is the new global currency, the gifts of enlightenment and wisdom given to mankind from people like Jesus, Buddha, ,John Lennon, Muhammad Ali, Einstein, etc, etc are being trampled on by the 2% of our species that undertake upon themselves to lead.

Music tells me that there is no race or difference in humans that is significantly important. The difference is at an individual level.

Sell lies about Jesus ,if you like. Clutch at straws and eulogize about a 'better place', if you so wish. Leave me out of this,....I am gone!

Imagine!

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us, only sky
Imagine all the people
Livin' for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too
Imagine all the people
Livin' life in peace

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one

Einstein

"Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I am not yet completely sure about the universe."

"A human being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."

Thanks

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to Masterblaster in post #6]

Yes. We do seem to feel trapped in a big mystery we don't understand and can't control. Ourselves not least of it

I have found that half -full is quite satisfying. Humans are made human by curiosity, I think. Answering the questions satisfies a lot and accepting that some questions may never be answered is accepted.

When we go out and gaze at the stars, they are more amazing because we know what they are the answer that they are 'lights' put there by a big invisible human isn't actually satisfying.


Discovery, and understanding is better than fairy tales, and we have to get over this fallacy that knowing what things are and how they work robs nature of beauty. If anything it makes it morewonderful.

Research into 'alternatives' is ok. But the problem is that the alternatives seem to share a common feature - reluctance to be Tested and demanding Faith. No claim should be afraid of being tested and any claim that tries to refuse testing and demands Faith and rejects the results of testing as some kind of conspiracy against their faith is pretty much admitting they are guil;ty of fraud and know it, and we have to know it, too.

Part of the Big Lie is to claim that science is the same kind of lie and Faith, but it is looking to be proven wrong all the time. Because in proving a previous belief wrong, we find out what's right. Faithclaims and denial of debunking evidence is not a virtue, it is the worst thing humanity can do to ourselves in cheating us of our right to know,learn and understand and keep us sacrificing virgins (or at least large sums of money) to false gods.

That is at least my 'Faith' and I am willing to let others (including our 81 browsing guests, whom I heartily welcome) decide how they want to live and what they believe.

[Masterblaster]

Hello

People assume that people like John Lennon and Einstein, were true atheists. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have been reading the ideas of Einstein. In 'Imagine', John Lennon , never dismisses God. Jesus in the same way validates the concept and modus of theism. All these great people vehemently object to stupid religion. The are all three, revolutionists and all show pitious exasperation with people who follow religious doctrines towards a zombie Apocalypse. They have equal distain for the pedantic ,educational, dullness of modern Skepticism.

Einstein
"My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind."

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly."



Everything is relative, and anyway,....what the ...would he know!


Thanks

[TRANSPONDER]

Yes. Aside Einstein or Lennon, atheism does not and cannot logically rule out a god of some sort, though it does not and cannot place much reliance on the claim. There are some'constants' questions that may be a bit of support for a Designer, but against that, the universe and world seems to have done its' best to kill all life, and life on earth is a lucky happenstance that battled through against an environment that was 'designed' to kill it, and indeedf evolved simply to adapt to environment.

But there. god or not, atheism does not and cannot suppose that any of the gods on offer are anything but man's fantasies designed to Imagine answers to questions they couldn't answer until science did.

And I'm going to try yore-wall patience with some God -praise of the musical kind. Even those who have no interest in music - as distinct from guitar -smashing or singers with (as Aristophanes put it) ants in the larynx - may be familiar with 'The planets', at least Mars, which is used as the intro for so many space - presentations (1) but of course nothing else he ever wrote even if they know 'Venus' and Jupiter (which has the English national anthem as distinct from Elgar's British national anthem and "America" can keep that God save the king - thing we pinched from the Prussians (2) But You-wall may boast to your friends that you heard another piece he wrote , Short festival Te Deum. Which like many a Tedium, starts out with an inspiring bang and ends with a miserable whimper.



But music, even cast in a religious form inspires me with 'god -feelings' even if like the voice in my head, I know it's me.

But to get back (at last) to the OP, it is a point (which I sorta missed, talking about contradictions) why Jesus failed. The parable of the failed figtree (Mark - Matthew gospel version, not in Luke) is a 'prediction' of the Jewish war because the Jews would reject Jesus. Jesus knew it would fail and God knew. So why go ahead with it at all? Well obviously it was the Plan that had to get Jesus killed to provide a loophole from Sin -death. So the Romans had to kill Jesus. But why punish the Jews? Well, they didn't 'accept' Jesus at the time, but neither did Greeks and Romans. Well, cut to the chase, Pauline Christianity wanted to blame the Jews and excuse Rome for the crucifixion, and never mind whether it made any sense or not.

(1) let an old man ramble on as I recall a meeting on the UFO group I joined (my only experience of a near religious Cult) and their video presentation of the members and their telescopes at Warminster (a rumored UFO hotspot) and they saw nothing. And of course they had "Mars" as accompanying dramatic sound -track and then followed with the less dramatic Frank Sinatra singing 'Fly me to the moon' and after that they rather gave up.

(2)

"British national anthem" (or should be)


English national anthem - or should be (from 'Jupiter' by Holst).



And 'that thing' we got from Prussia. Though there areclued they pinced it from Britan first off.

[Masterblaster]

Hello TRANSPONDER

I decided to tap into Einsteins intellect , this morning. It was Buddha, yesterday.(Why am I talking to you?...joke,T)

There are quotes from this Einstein guy that resonate with some of the discussions we have shared in the last year. Recognize any connects??

Einstein

"Look deep into nature, and then you will understand everything better."

"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

"Once we accept our limits, we go beyond them."

"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war. "

"Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal."

"I am not only a pacifist but a militant pacifist. I am willing to fight for peace. Nothing will end war unless the people themselves refuse to go to war."

Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish.

That last one is very, Jesusy,T, don't you think.
I underlined my personal favourites in this 'Quote Dig'.

Buddha, Lennon, Jesus, Einstein, have all the stigma of failure about them,...Jesus, more than any of them. Did Buddha stop suffering, ..did he show a real way to overcome suffering that was anything other than fatalistic resignation. Did Einstein not pour petrol on our scientific pyre? Are the Beatle's Back Catalogues not the ultimate acquisition?

Maybe Idealism is a lie?

This could be very effectively argued.
Maybe selling nonsense about a Jesus figure was undertaken with a subconscious opportunistic sincerity, and was being perceived as the best option on the table. Many religious, political, and scientific intelligencia really believe that their tides float all boats. They get away with murder. Are people fatally predicated to the troop. Is there no other perceived way. Why have we prohibited ourselves and our options.

Biden or Trump
Will Israel retaliate?
Ukraine funding? Yes or No?
Etc, etc,etc ???

Must all troops have an Alpha leader??

Really, ....still in 2024.

My God!

Thanks
ps:Einstein - "In matters of truth and justice, there is no difference between large and small problems, for issues concerning the treatment of people are all the same."