Feed on Posts or Comments 17 September 2014

Christianity &Islam &Science Thomas on 24 Jan 2010 12:24 am

The “miracles” of Jesus and other God-men explained

In many parts of the world today there are people performing “miracles” for money. Here’s how they do it, and the effect they can have on ignorant villagers:

37 Responses to “The “miracles” of Jesus and other God-men explained”

  1. on 24 Jan 2010 at 2:15 am 1.FooBar said …

    This is great. These people should get an award. Now if only we could get them to tour the US!

  2. on 24 Jan 2010 at 4:27 am 2.Horatio said …

    So, where are the videos of Jesus doing the same thing?

    A claim does provide some evidence, right?

  3. on 24 Jan 2010 at 6:19 am 3.Severin said …

    2 Horatio
    “So, where are the videos of Jesus doing the same thing?”

    I am sure you will believe the Bible more than any video.
    So, read the Bible about Jesus’es “miracles”!
    This video perfectly fits to my visualisation of his “miracles”!
    As I said earlier: circus!

  4. on 24 Jan 2010 at 8:14 pm 4.Lou said …

    Not to far back, the claim was Jesus never existed. Quite the confused bunch or maybe a desperate bunch. The carpenter from 2000 years back still strikes fear and awe.

  5. on 24 Jan 2010 at 10:32 pm 5.RhesusPieces said …

    Lou…

    I personally doubt in the historicity of Jesus. I doubt he was ever a real person. Possibly based on a real person (just like Noah, Hercules, etc. are likely based on real people that lived once long long ago). But, there were charlatans during the biblical age just as there are charlatans now, and if Jesus were a real person, I doubt he was anything but a charlatan, using tricks like these people just exposed.

    What is more likely? God impregnated Mary (much like many other gods of the ancient world) who gave birth to Jesus who performed miracles (aka magic tricks, also similar to other gods of the ancient world) or that Jesus was created by an early cult leader or that Jesus was real but a fraud? I think the last two options are much more likely than your Jesus being both real and divine.

  6. on 25 Jan 2010 at 3:23 am 6.Rostam said …

    I haven no problem with with doubters. Only problem with those who claim to know. Big difference. More likely? Based on what evidence you consider authentic. You should look at the other side before making your judgment. You may be surprised.

    it is funny one post claims Jesus didn’t exist and then another attempts to show how he performed his miracles. R U jumping on your horse and running in 4 different directions?

  7. on 25 Jan 2010 at 3:42 pm 7.RhesusPieces said …

    am i jumping on the horse? not at all (unless the horse is saying that jesus likely didn’t exist). i have looked at the evidence, both sides. and his existence doesn’t have much credible evidence for it.

    did jesus exist? in my opinion, based on the historical evidence, no, he didn’t. at least, not in the way that the bible claims. is the biblical jesus based on a real person? possibly. was that person named jesus? possibly. we know of others who claimed divine origin and to have performed miracles including resurrection. throw in a lack of non-biblical references to a historical jesus or events associated with him, and factual inaccuracies within the bible, there seems to be no reason to believe that he ever existed. and if he did exist, he was probably nothing more than a biblical david koresh. if he actually performed miracles, i doubt they were any different than the tricks hucksters have been performing for millenia.

    what’s funny about different people having different opinions and ideas? considering how little information there is regarding the historical jesus, it’s not shocking people will have many different ideas.

  8. on 25 Jan 2010 at 5:58 pm 8.Mr Q said …

    Of course Jesus existed and the bible is “the truth” and it says he existed. And we have only one flavour of christianity to prove it…..

  9. on 25 Jan 2010 at 7:06 pm 9.Severin said …

    „A rhetorical question is one that requires no answer because the answer is obvious and doesn’t need to be stated . The speaker (of the rhetorical question) is not looking for an answer but is making some kind of a point, as in an argument.”
    http://www.usingenglish.com/glossary/rhetorical-question.html

    Some people have never heard about rhetorical questions.
    So, if someone who denies divinity of Jesus, poses a question about his “deeds”, such as: “Why didn’t Jesus do something more spectacular than transfering water to wine, to prove himself a god”, it in no way means that one, who posed this question, recognizes Jesus as god.

    Never heard? I did not expect you did.

  10. on 25 Jan 2010 at 8:13 pm 10.Spence. said …

    LOL, Jesus has so many writers, testimonies & contemporaries who acknowledge his existence. I believe it is just wishful thinking. Its much like those who deny the holocaust. If you want to believe something badly enough, you will ignore all the accounts.

    Imagine the conspiracy that had to take place to place all the writings about Jesus. Even the vast majority of historians believe he existed. keep wishing…

  11. on 25 Jan 2010 at 9:13 pm 11.LOL is right said …

    LOL, Mohammed has so many writers, testimonies & contemporaries who acknowledge his existence. I believe it is just wishful thinking. Its much like those who deny the holocaust. If you want to believe something badly enough, you will ignore all the accounts.
    Imagine the conspiracy that had to take place to place all the writings about Mohammed. Even the vast majority of historians believe he existed. keep wishing…

  12. on 25 Jan 2010 at 9:22 pm 12.Mr Q said …

    LOL, Vishnu has so many writers, testimonies & contemporaries who acknowledge his existence. I believe it is just wishful thinking. Its much like those who deny the holocaust. If you want to believe something badly enough, you will ignore all the accounts.
    Imagine the conspiracy that had to take place to place all the writings about Vishnu. Even the vast majority of historians believe he existed. keep wishing…

  13. on 25 Jan 2010 at 9:25 pm 13.Mr Conspiracy said …

    So….you now claim Mohammed never existed either? We have some very insecure atheist in the house!

    I don’t believe atheist really exists. They are just holograms! Beep beep take me to your leader.

  14. on 25 Jan 2010 at 11:47 pm 14.Paxalot said …

    Historical verification of Jesus is weak. Evidence of forgeries is impressive. Even if Jesus did exist nothing was put down on paper until Paul started writing years after Jesus’ death. Even then Paul mentioned absolutely nothing of miracles, prayers or teachings – only death and salvation. How likely is it that accounts of someone’s life are accurate written decades after that persons death in an age where nearly everyone was illiterate and scientifically ignorant? Why wouldn’t Paul know anything detailed about Christ but the biblical authors somehow did decades after Paul’s writings? Paul supposedly knew living disciples. The biblical authors did not. Most likely writings were apologetics written to explain why Jesus’ most profound promises of a quick return turned out to be false prophecies.

  15. on 25 Jan 2010 at 11:55 pm 15.Xenon said …

    “Even if Jesus did exist nothing was put down on paper until Paul started writing years after Jesus’ death.”

    Untrue, the book of Mark was the first. How about Luke, John and Matthew who were all disciples with first hand knowledge? He was real as Aristotle and there is little doubt about it.

  16. on 26 Jan 2010 at 1:52 am 16.RhesusPieces said …

    Mr. Q… “Of course Jesus existed and the bible is “the truth” and it says he existed. And we have only one flavour of christianity to prove it…..”

    well, that’s only if the bible is actually the truth… what if it’s not? considering how inaccurate it is, it doesn’t strike me as likely being “the truth.” and one flavour of christianity? do you not know anything about the history of the religion? there hasn’t been only one flavor of it since it was started.

    Spence… care to name some of those sources of contemporaries? I’d love to see it, because every source I’ve ever found or been shown has not been contemporary, and has not been better than “I heard of a guy who knew a guy who’s sister’s brothers uncle’s cousins hair dresser saw at the temple.”

    Xenon… considering that most historians believe Mark was written in 70AD at earliest, it’s still about 40 years after Christ supposedly died. And Matthew and Luke were based off of Mark. It’s unlikely any of them were the actual disciples, it’s more likely that they were written by people who had lived after Jesus supposedly did, and wrote things based on hearsay, and as apologetics, not with first hand knowledge.

  17. on 26 Jan 2010 at 1:00 pm 17.Rostam said …

    “It’s unlikely any of them were the actual disciples”

    Based on what evidence? Why would authors John, Mark, Like, Matthew all lie about a man who was considered a criminal by the state and a heretic by the Jewish community?

    You claims make no sense. People lie to better themselves or to receive riches of which this case offers none. It gained them death and why would four witnesses who would have known for a FACT Jesus was a fraud risk death on a lie? You must do better.

  18. on 26 Jan 2010 at 4:05 pm 18.Severin said …

    “…a man who was considered a criminal by the state and a heretic by the Jewish community?”

    1.Jesus was condemned from ROMAN authorities, according to Roman laws, for “criminal” not for “heresy”.
    2 other people were condemned together with him, as thieves. He was NOT punished for his “heresy”, but for his doing a mess in a temple. Crucifying was regular way of punishment in Rome (not in Judea!) of that time, and happened on dayly basis.
    2. All religions, at all times, cruelly punished „heretics“. Why would Jewish community differ?
    If Roman authorities did not crucify Jesus for doing a mess in temple (in case Judea was not accupied by Roomans, but had its own authority), they would probably condemn him for heresy themself, but probably to stoning, as typical punishment for Jewish community of that time.
    What did catholic church to their „heretics“?

  19. on 26 Jan 2010 at 5:15 pm 19.Xenon said …

    “Jesus was condemned from ROMAN authorities, according to Roman laws, for “criminal” not for “heresy”.”

    No Severin, you are incorrect. Read the Gospels and then respond when you determine why he was crucified by the state.

    And yes, the Jewish culture considered him to be a heretic for claiming to be the son of God.

  20. on 26 Jan 2010 at 7:21 pm 20.Rostam said …

    Severin where do you get your facts from? Jesus was taken to the Roman authorities by the Jews. Pilot and Herod wanted nothing to do with the execution of Jesus but in order to avoid an uprising in the territory of Galilee they relented in order not to possibly lose their governorship.

    Anyhow, that was not the point neither was it the question.

  21. on 26 Jan 2010 at 8:13 pm 21.Severin said …

    „According to the Gospels, Jesus had no particular quarrel with Rome and did not violate Roman law. And yet he was punished by the Romans in accordance with Roman law, and executed by a means exclusively reserved for those guilty of crimes against the empire.“
    http://www.halexandria.org/dward229.htm

    You always require some evidences from me and never offer any from yours. Not fair, but I am trying to stay behind my words. How about you?

    The next was the point neither, but you did not react:
    “Why would authors John, Mark, Like, Matthew all lie about a man who was considered a criminal by the state and a heretic by the Jewish community?”
    That was the point I replied to.

  22. on 26 Jan 2010 at 8:55 pm 22.Rostam said …

    Severin

    You first state Jesus was crucified for “criminal” not for “heresy”. However you still have not offered any proof Jesus was executed for crimes against Rome. Your cut’n paste does not support your argument. He was executed due to pressure put on by the Jewish community.

    here let me help:

    “I wash my hands of His blood. I find no fault in Him.” Pilate from the Gospel of Matthew.

    As well, you did not answer the original question.

  23. on 26 Jan 2010 at 9:35 pm 23.Severin said …

    Firstly, Gospels are in no way proved to be historical facts.
    In case it happened according to Gospels anyway, what is unusual there? A small, unimportant event among millions similar events, even more tragical ones.
    Jesus was a Jew who pretended to be a king AND a god. No more, no less!
    In an occupied country, elites tried to keep as much power as possible, as everywhere, any time, during human history, and elites in Judea were priests, as in most countries of that time.
    When one of THEM (Jesus, a Jew) endangered their position claiming he was a king and a god, what would one expect them to do?
    They had no direct power, and used occupation governer to do a job for them.
    Pilate was also clever! In accoupied country, he chose the „cheapest“ way to calm the situation down: he condamned Jesus to satisfy priests, who othrewise could have done problems to him.
    Human history and history of all imaginable religions are FULL of such examples!
    Remember Kvisling (Norwey), Petain (France)….?
    History of catholic church does not differ: they killed millions for „blasphemy“!
    Imagine a guy entering a catholic church, in 15th century, claiming he was a king and a god! Just imagine what would happen to him immediately!

    I never understood why such a noise about Jesus’es crucification. If the man ever existed, I am sorry for him, but no more than I am sorry for other millions of victims of any violent authority, be it religion or something else.

    The main problem is that Jesus, wether historical or thought up, was misused by christianity by proclaiming him a god.
    That, however, is another story – god’s existance was never proved.

  24. on 26 Jan 2010 at 10:56 pm 24.Rostam said …

    Well, Severin couldn’t answer the question, well I’m not sure what he is proposing. In any regard, anyone else like to take a stab at it.

    Your claims make no sense. People lie to better themselves or to receive riches of which this case offers none. It gained them death and why would four witnesses who would have known for a FACT Jesus was a fraud risk death on a lie? You must do better.

  25. on 27 Jan 2010 at 9:22 am 25.Severin said …

    Rostam 24
    „Well, Severin couldn’t answer the question,…“
    Sorry, what was the question?
    And by whot logic am I obligate to answer your questions, and your duty is only to call me a lier, by missciting my comments, thus constructing your own lies?

    Firstly, in Rostam 20 you claimed EXACTLY the same I did in Severin 23:
    Rostam 20:
    “Jesus was taken to the Roman authorities by the Jews. Pilot and Herod wanted nothing to do with the execution of Jesus but in order to avoid an uprising in the territory of Galilee they relented in order not to possibly lose their governorship.”
    What else did I say?
    Where did you see me claiming that Jesus was condamned for criminals against Roman empire? Where did you see me claiming priests did not use Pilate to do a job for them?
    Who is lying here? Didn’t you see the quotation marks in my words „criminal“ and „heresy“?

    Can you please tell me what parts of my comment were lies?
    Is the only way you can discuss to falsify the comments you do not like and to call people liers?
    But first of all: your comments are without exception based on Gospels.
    If you do so, you have in the first place somehow prove that Gospels were reliable sources.
    Gospels are evidences for nothing!
    The Bible, as a historical source is not more relible than Odyssey or Hary Potter!

  26. on 27 Jan 2010 at 1:45 pm 26.Spence said …

    While I am here let me give this a shot.

    Our dear friends, the jihadist are brainwashed into their belief system. They have no visible means of readily verifying the beliefs of Islam. The disciples of Jesus would have quickly known if he truly fulfilled the claims he made. If he did not, they would have never lived lives that led to a martyrs death.

  27. on 27 Jan 2010 at 2:44 pm 27.Severin said …

    26 Spence
    You are out of your mind, please do not disgrace yourself any longer on this public blog. I am sorry for you.
    Where did you find “jihadists”?

  28. on 27 Jan 2010 at 4:56 pm 28.Burebista said …

    By any secular standard, Jesus is the most dominant figure in Western culture. Much of what we now think of as Western ideas, inventions and values finds its source or inspiration in the religion that worships God in his name. Art and science, the self and society, politics and economics, marriage and family, right and wrong, body and soul all have been impacted and radically transformed by Christian influence. It is without debate.

  29. on 27 Jan 2010 at 5:55 pm 29.Severin said …

    “…all have been impacted and radically transformed by Christian influence. It is without debate.”

    It is.
    As soon as we start debating the results.

  30. on 27 Jan 2010 at 5:57 pm 30.Severin said …

    Maistake:

    “…all have been impacted and radically transformed by Christian influence. It is without debate.”

    It is.
    Until we start debating the results.

  31. on 27 Jan 2010 at 7:32 pm 31.Rico said …

    PROOF That there are no Christains

    Luke 14:26-33 (New International Version)
    26″If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple. 27And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.

    28″Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Will he not first sit down and estimate the cost to see if he has enough money to complete it? 29For if he lays the foundation and is not able to finish it, everyone who sees it will ridicule him, 30saying, ‘This fellow began to build and was not able to finish.’

    31″Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Will he not first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? 32If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace. 33In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple.

  32. on 27 Jan 2010 at 10:06 pm 32.Burebista said …

    Where is the proof?

  33. on 28 Jan 2010 at 9:34 am 33.Severin said …

    Burebista 32
    “Where is the proof?”
    Why do you thik I am obligated to offer proofs, and you are not?
    If you require proofs for my claims, it automatically means that your opinion is oposite to mine.
    Why do you think you are all the time pardoned of offering some proofs for YOUR opinion?

    However, I will give you some hints:
    What better proof you need but history itself.
    After Romans accpeted christianity as official religion (Theodosius, 4th century), the empire almost immediately fell apart, and 1000 years of dark middle age began in Europe.
    All scientific accomplishments were forgotten and if not forgotten, they were forbidden. No doubt that catholic churc ruled the world in that period, and all you can see during those 1000 years was poverty, ignorance, suppressing of any free thinking, wars, killings and torturings “in name of god”.

    Aristarh (300 B.C.) made the first intelligent assumptions about heliocentric system, but catholic church forbid such an idea, and burnt people for the next 1800 years if someone dared to opose. Kopernicus, who was affraid for his life, “discovered” heliocentrism some 1800 years after Aristarh, and Giordan Bruno was burnt for supporting the idea! Gallileo was punished for his achievments (almost burnt too).
    All positive human achievments in all possible fields were done DESPITE efforts of church to suppress them. No exception!
    Many were killed by church for their honest and intelligent efforts to teach the scientific truths, oposite to church bullshits.
    People had to risk (and lost) their lives to do something good for human race.
    So, christianity (as any other religion) gave NOTHING positive to human race, baut was (as all religions) a “brake” for development of free thought.
    If christianity was not present, we would probably have peniciline some 200 years earlier, and be on the moon at least 150 years earlier than we did.

  34. on 28 Jan 2010 at 11:59 am 34.Burebista said …

    Severin you just keep on with your aimless ranting. My post was to Rico. Try reading before typing.

  35. on 28 Jan 2010 at 4:36 pm 35.Severin said …

    Burebista 34
    It is not difficult to avoid your own aimless ranting by positioning yourself as a “judge” who somewhere from heights only poses questions here and there and says nothing from himself.
    Even if I did mistake, so what? Whenever you see a comment that does not fit your opinion, you have no answer, but use insults as answers.
    Typical!

  36. on 28 Jan 2010 at 5:31 pm 36.FOC said …

    I think it is sad that all you Christian haters know the bible so well just to hurt the Christians, dont you have something better to do? and all you are doing is fighting with no end, because as Severin said. “Whenever you see a comment that does not fit your opinion, you have no answer, but use insults as answers.” so this is pretty pointless, I mean i do not think a true Christian is going to be troubled by all your guys proof, I know God is real and loves me and I hope the other Christians do to. so good luck to all non Christians, and enjoy earth while you can.

  37. on 28 Jan 2010 at 11:01 pm 37.Severin said …

    36 FOC
    (sorry I put this comment on the wrong place)
    “I think it is sad that all you Christian haters…”

    Dear FOC, I do not hate anyone! Where did you see me expressing any hate to anyone? It is not in my nature to hate!
    My grandies were active christians, and I loved them very much, as I love today many of my friends who are believers. It, of course, does not mean that I accept their religion. I accept THEM as friends, not asking them about their beliefs. But, we DO sometimes debate among us, without hard feelings, and – beacause we are friends and mutually tollerable – we debate MUCH „sharper“ than on these pages.
    Debating is exchanging of arguments, nothing more, nothing less, and on these pages in much more cases believers expressed direct hate, threats and insults, than atheists, you just investigate these pages carefully.
    Calling someone names, in this case „christian haters“ does not replace arguments!
    .
    But it is typical that, when faced to a paradox, such as incestous relations among Adam’s and Eve’s children, not only alowed, but ordered by their god („…be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth”!…/by having sex with your own brothers and sisters, as nobody else is available!/), believers in most cases can not resist to threaten/offend instead of offering counter-arguments.
    This is not nice, and does not show believers in good light, but it’s them, what can I do?

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply