Reply With Quote
This is exactly what I'm thinking.
"Let's just park the boat here... No, a little further... There you go. Now, watch this!"It'd be hilarious to see a skit of Jesus timing it just correctly to walk on water/ice.
I was able to pull up a copy of the original digital photo of "the walk" and it's obvious to anyone with eyes that ice had nothing to do with it.
Even if there were ice with waves the size of those it would have been more surfing than walking.
Perhaps someone would be so kind as to fax a copy of this photo to the good Professor Nof.
You do realize that this picture does nothing to disuade his arguments.... unless it was painted while Jesus was in the act of walking to the boat...
This is exactly what I'm thinking.
"Let's just park the boat here... No, a little further... There you go. Now, watch this!"
I think it's funny that "believers" think it unlikely that the ice could line up correctly. Yes, that MUCH less likely than him actually treading upon H2O...
And now that painting portrays, even proves without a doubt, EXACTLY how Christ did it?
Can these simplistic Bible-thumpers be any dumber?
boutons continues his struggle with humor.
Last edited by Spurminator; 04-05-2006 at 10:44 PM.
No, you know what's more likely? That the entire story was completely made up.I think it's funny that "believers" think it unlikely that the ice could line up correctly. Yes, that MUCH less likely than him actually treading upon H2O...
I'd say that's probably the route athiests should pursue instead of the "How might Jesus have faked the whole thing for the Apostles" argument.... Just a tip, take it or leave it.
Prove to me that you're no fool
Walk across my swimmin' pool
This has got to be the most pathetic attempt at disproving a belief that I have ever seen. Does anybody seriously think that this is more logical than walking on water? Walking on water, if it happened, means that it was a miracle, which means God exists(or Jesus was a master magician...and actually created Narnia.). If God exists, then walking on water is a minor achievement. If God does not exist, there is no walking on water, and walking on ice, in this instance, is well-near impossible. Lets see.
-The people who "witnessed" the miracle would have to not have heard of ice formations in the area, or they would have been su ious.
-The ice would have been thick enough to support an adult male, and long enough for him to walk on...but yet small enough to not affect small wooden ships.
-As said, Paul would have had to have been punked to .
-Jesus would have had to have taken the time to land perfectly on the ice, and know where it ends, which not only takes a great measure of planning, but some visibility of the ice to on-lookers.
Now, there are 5 possibilities.
A. There is a God, it really happened.
B. There is a God, Jesus was just whacko, never happened.
C. There is no God, Jesus walked on ice.
D. There is no God, people made the story up.
E. Or, there is a God, but it was a story made up to give an idea of the powers of Christ.
Well, we can safely say that, because of the unbelievably low-probability in every single one of the previously mentioned Ice-walking points being true, as well as the rare occurance of ice in the 1st place, that the least likely answer is C. That Jesus walked on ice. Purely based on Ockham's Razor, we should always attempt to accept the simplest belief, and while that may not be believing in a God that created the Universe, it sure as is not believing that every one of those rare chances all fell into place for an elaborate joke. Either say it never happened, or that it did. Don't make an ass out of yourself with such a ridiculous theory.
Jeez.
I think it's funny that "believers" think it unlikely that the ice could line up correctly. Yes, that MUCH less likely than him actually treading upon H2O...
Let me clue you on something.
We "believers" believe The Christ to be God.
We not only believe he did not need the aid of ice perfectly aligned to walk on water, but we also believe he could (and did) raise the dead, heal the sick, make the blind see, the deaf hear and the dumb speak. We believe he could stop the wind from blowing and feed five thousand with a couple loaves of bread and a few fishes.
And most important of all, we believe he died and resurrected after three days. And given that he did this for us,you and me have a shot at eternal life.
Those are the "funny" things we believe Jesus did 2000 years ago.
Prove to me that you're devine
Turn my water into wine
You have put more logic and substance to one of my earliest posts where I state that you either believe in the mericales performed by Jesus because he was who he claims he was, or you don't (like extatic and boutons, who don't).
The "ice" theory is pretty dumb.
He did it because he is God. He can do anything. I know that is dificult to fathom in your small, constrained, narrow, materialistic mind, but that is what we believers/simplistic/Bible-thumping Christians believe in.And now that painting portrays, even proves without a doubt, EXACTLY how Christ did it?
Can these simplistic Bible-thumpers be any dumber?
Excellent tip.
Atheist should take it because the "explanations" such as the ice theory makes you look not so bright.
I'm a believer, but Jesus is not God.
If Jesus is not God, then who is he?
God didn't create Jesus... God went down to this physical world in which we live and lived as Jesus. God's other form is called the Holy Spirit and the other one is our Father. This is called the Trinity.
Jesus is His son as the Bible says.
No Jesus is the Son not a son. Big difference if you think about it.
The Bible says Jesus is The son of God.
And Jesus prays to God in the Bible.
God doesn't need to pray to Himself.
Check this out:
the Bible in numerous places calls Jesus the Son of God. But, it does not mean that Jesus is the literal offspring of God.
The Term "Son of God" occurs 47 times in the King James New Testament. In reference to Jesus, it is a le as the heavenly, eternal Son who is equal to God the Father (John 5:18-24). It is Jesus who fully reveals the Father (Matt. 11:27). He is the exact representation of the Father (Heb. 1:1-3), He possesses all authority in heaven and earth (Matt. 28:18), and Jesus had glory with the Father before the world was made (John 17:5)
^^^ and it says that Jesus sits at the right hand of God.
God wouldn't need to sit at His Own right hand.
That means that God has three forms, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. All are equal and the same. There's no difference except the forms they represent.
Some online stuff for you:
Question: "What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of God?"
Answer: Jesus is not God’s Son in the sense of how we think of a father and a son. God did not get married and have a son. Jesus is God’s Son in the sense that He is God made manifest in human form (John 1:1,14). Jesus is God's Son in that He was conceived by the Holy Spirit. Luke 1:35 declares, "The angel answered, 'The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.'" In Bible times, the phrase “son of man” was used to describe a human being. The son of a man is a man.
Another example can be found in John 17:12 where Judas as described as the "son of perdition." John 6:71 tells us that Judas was the son of Simon. What does John 17:12 mean by describing Judas as the "son of perdition"? The word "perdition" means "destruction, ruin, waste." Judas was not the literal son of "ruin, destruction, and waste" - but those things were the iden y of Judas' life. Judas was a manifestation of perdition. In this same aspect, Jesus is the Son of God. The Son of God is God. Jesus is God made manifest (John 1:1,14).
IF PEOPLE were to read the Bible from cover to cover without any preconceived idea of a Trinity, they wouldn't arrive at such a concept on their own at all.
What comes through very clearly to an impartial reader is that God alone is the Almighty, the Creator, separate and distinct from anyone else, and that Jesus, even in his prehuman existence, is also separate and distinct, a created being, subordinate to God.
Yeah I'm not going to argue with you there and I used to think the same actually. It just makes sense though when you sit down to think about it that God is Jesus. You can't pray to Jesus and worship him because that would be blasphemy to God since you can't pray to anyone other than God. He wants you to accept Jesus as your savior and worship Him in which God is Jesus otherwise you would be praying to God and Jesus seperately and not together which like I said would be blasphemy.
I'm not going to say if it's wrong or not but it's my belief but I don't understand this with the Catholics and the whole saints things. God said not to worship anyone but Him...
John 8:42
Jesus said to them: “If God were YOUR Father, YOU would love me, for from God I came forth and am here. Neither have I come of my own initiative at all, but that One sent me forth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That pretty much seperates them as not being the same person.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions