Re: Re: Re: Did Jesus Walk on Water or on Ice?
| Posted On: 04/16/06 06:14:07 PM |
Age 70, FL |
YES JESUS WALKED ON WATER. GOD'S WORD SAID IT,I BELIVE GOD'S WORD AND GOD'S WORD SETTLES IT REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE SECULAR WORK BELIEVES. TIGERFUFF1
|
Re: Did Jesus Walk on Water or on Ice?
| Posted On: 04/15/06 12:03:43 AM |
Age 62, TX |
George Ernest Wright & Reginald Fuller in The Book of the Acts of God [1960] wrote this. Biblical man did not look upon a miracle quite as we do. He did not have such a word in his vocabulary. He spoke of signs and wonders. Any unusual or spectacular happening that was a sign of the direct working of God -- this was his miracle. If a modern man could have stood beside him and given a rational explanation of all the events through which he passed, he would not have been particularly impressed. His question would always have been, Well, why did they happen at exactly this time in this way and secure this result? To us the major focus of attention in the matter of miracle is to explain how it could have happened without setting aside natural law. With him the point was rather what was happening, what was going on, what result God achieved through the unusual.
Walking on water did make the point of the deity of Jesus; also it might be making a point relevant to the purpose of the coming of Jesus. Jewish symbolism in the Bible contrasts the land and sea. The land as a stable and dependable footing stood for the Jewish nation chosen of God is contrasted with the sea as a fluid tossed by the wind was not only an unsuitable footing but also presented an ever changing environment from tempest to calm. The unpredictable sea stood for the gentile nations subject to being misguided by their false beliefs (Isaiah 17:12; Daniel 7:2-3; Revelation 7:1). Hence, walking on the water may have demonstrated the power of the Jesus in the new covenant over the unstable gentile world - the sea. Similarly, the miracle of the calming of the tempest may be understood.
Here is my point. Believing is a requirement for seeing or understanding scripture. If we are trying to reason the possibility of miracle we will find ourselves like the unperceptive disciples who did not understand after the feeding of the four thousand (Mark 8:11-21). It seems the saints must first be blind and foolish because after reasoning, arguing, and opposing the Lord - Peter, Thomas, Paul, and the others believed and understood what before had not been observable to their hardened hearts, even though it was visible. In a different context Albert Einstein stated, There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is. Believing the scriptures is a requirement for seeing or understanding divine revelation. Having spent my efforts reasoning with scoffers, I remain amazed when by the Holy Spirits power I hear them proclaim, I will never doubt again! My reasoning has never been so persuasive. 4/14/2006 GBS gboydsmith@sbcglobal.net
|
Re: Did Jesus Walk on Water or on Ice?
| Posted On: 04/13/06 04:54:20 PM |
Age 56, AR |
First Nof has to believe that the bible is innerant, infallible and beyond question; literally true.
|
Re: Re: Did Jesus Walk on Water or on Ice?
| Posted On: 04/13/06 02:02:33 PM |
Age 36, OR |
The last poster kind of stole my thunder, but I actually heard about this (Professor) Doron Nof's theory on the radio. I (being a high school drop out) immediately wondered how a small fishing boat (I presume) would be out in or on the ice, or why. Then I began to wonder about how long it took Jesus to heal his his feet from frostbite and then heal peter who was completely submerged in freezing waters. There is just way too many problems with this theory. It is more sad than humorous actually, if you think about the extent the enemies of God will go to, to deny Him.
I wonder if the Professor will respond to the other poster's email...
|
Re: Did Jesus Walk on Water or on Ice?
| Posted On: 04/13/06 07:55:03 AM |
Age 65, TX |
After I read the newspaper account I sent the following email to Professor Nof:
"Dear Dr. Nof:
I read with some interest and amusement the newspaper reports of the publication of your paleolimnological explanation for Jesus' nocturnal aquatic walk on the Sea of Galilee. I have not read your paper, but my understanding is that you and your coworkers speculate about a two day period within a thousand year span. I wonder what the odds are that these hypothetical two days would fall with the three years of Jesus' ministry, let alone on the specific day of the walk? I suspect that they are something well beyond a million to one! Did the paper makes such an analysis?
A careful reading of the Scriptures (Mathew 14, for example, is one of three eye witness accounts of the incident) discloses that on the day of Jesus nighttime stroll across the Sea of Galilee, he spent hours talking to thousands of people and, in fact, performed another miracle - the Feeding of the Five Thousand. For your speculation to be true thousands of people would have had to spend the day in sub-freezing weather. Clearly they must have been a hardy bunch! However, the eye witness accounts make no mention of adverse weather conditions during the daylight hours.
There is a three acre pond on my former property in upstate New York. After living there for 20 years I can tell you that it takes much longer than two days at 25 degrees F to form ice of sufficient thickness to support a grown man. Moreover, a careful reading of Scripture would also have revealed that Jesus made his walk during a severe storm. A storm of such ferocity that the Disciples feared for their lives! It is most unlikely that sheets of ice would have survived in the waves of this storm.
If your speculation is correct, then Peter apparently was a victim of a practical joke committed by his Lord. At Jesus' invitation Peter attempted to walk on the water (ice?) but sank when his faith failed him. No, to be consistent with your conclusion he sank when he fell through a hole in the ice - a hole Jesus would have known was there.
To me such research is "science" at its worst. Indeed, I have to wonder about your motivation to invest the time and resources to conduct such a "study". The biblical accounts would lead most scientist to conclude at the outset that the weather conditions precluded significant ice formation on that day. Yet you persisted in advancing your "story." It seems that you are willing to sacrifice objectivity (not to mention common sense) to present a "natural" explanation for Jesus' walk on water. I can only conclude that discrediting the Bible must be a very high priority for you. I suspect that you have unwittingly simply brought embarrassment on yourself."
|
|
|
|
|
