Do Christians literally believe Jesus healed all of those people in the gospels...

Do Christians literally believe Jesus healed all of those people in the gospels? Such as in Mathew where he heals blind people.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_influence_theory_of_atonement
youtube.com/watch?v=AT7cnOkGcBQ
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Bump

yes

How do you reconcile this with the fact it's completely at odds with science?

Yes.
Christ is God and God is omnipotent. Everything that could be done, God can do.
And we don't comprehend nature of everything that could be done. Sometimes God influences the world in the ways we can understand, and sometimes in ways that appear to be impossible to us, for their nature eludes us - miracles.

Of course. Jesus had sweet powers

>born of a virgin
>rose from the dead
And your doubts are about healing the blind?

Does science comprehend gravity?
It merely comprehends "how" it works, but not "why" it works.
Similarly with many other things.
To conclude that we know everything about what is possible and what is not, is rubbish.

Spirituality and belief themselves are at odd with what science tells us. For someone who has these ideas already, accepting that a man (albeit the metaphorical son of a god) can perform magical miracles isn't much a leap.

Do you need more than the Sermon on the Mount to convince you that Jesus is right moral authority? Don't let what other people say about him take away from how good his teachings are. We cannot know what he did, but we can read the words attributed to him. Those are plenty enough to believe. Stay away from the Gospel of John imo.

Yes
By being stupid. Same way any delusional retard reconciles his delusions with reality, just ignore any discrepancies.
Remember: FEELS>REALS

inb4 some retard starts spouting nonsense about exotic mass and negative energy when it's literally all conjecture that we're incapable of proving even exist.

>how good his teachings are
Promoting poverty and weakness are good? Decrying emotion, attachment, hard work and success is good?

Riddle me this: how do you answer divine questions by using human methods?

Jesus was a military messianic leader. He built, in death, a spiritual army that conquered entire armies. He preached rebellion, war, death, hardship.

You can actually!
>20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made
Romans 1,20
Although such God will be rather unspecified, not Christian in particular, but you can derive "an" eternal God from reason, just not "the" God.

Science is a method of discovery, not a list of what’s real and what’s not.
t. Scientist

Okay, so let me rephrase it: it's at odds with everything discovered by science so far. It's at odds with all of chemistry, biology, and physics.

Yes. When you understand logoi, then you can do the same thing. This is the basis for magic. Jesus is better at it because he is literally Logos itself.

Chemistry, biology, and physics are not a list of what’s possible and what’s not. Just because we haven’t learned how something works yet doesn’t mean it’s impossible. If that were the case we would just do away with science. Fortunately, reddit is not running the world.

>It hasn't been discovered by science, so it can't have happened
Literally a non-argument.

Does Jesus himself say anything about being the Logos? He says he is 'of the Father'. I think you should reread Pslam 82.

Do you believe pen and teller really make shit disappear?

It's in the Gospel of John

>magic
Please stop. Magic is not real

Not necesarily because it hasn't been discovered, rather it contradicts everything we do know.

Magical thinking is very real...

The Greek inspired Christian philosophers, like Augustine, refer to him as the logos.

Common argument, but can god make a rock that he cannot lift? If not then he's not omnipotent. If so then he's not omnipotent.
I'm guessing you're gonna say it's beyond our comprehension?

>Do Christians literally believe Jesus healed all of those people in the gospels? Such as in Mathew where he heals blind people.
Yes, we literally believe that.

>How do you reconcile this with the fact it's completely at odds with science?
Our God trumps your "science."

>Okay, so let me rephrase it: it's at odds with everything discovered by science so far. It's at odds with all of chemistry, biology, and physics.
Again, our God trumps your limited knowledge of the universe.

>Not necesarily because it hasn't been discovered, rather it contradicts everything we do know.
Which, you must admit is limited. Therefore you cannot prove that God healing people is impossible.

Christ is not bound by the limitations of this world. He is capable of all things. As the scriptures says those who are carnal minded cannot understand the ways of God

Yes He performed miracles. He is the son of God and conquered death. Died for our sins and through him we can speak to God the father, creator of everything. Healing lepers or some guy's ear is peanuts to all that.

Literally everything? Wow, fortunately we’ve never been wrong before. Pic related.

God programmed reality and gave cheat codes to his kid and some moderators.

God is a fable, the religion is just allegories and metaphors for how society and the individual should conduct themselves. Why is the Abrahamic god the true god when other religions pre-date it by thousands of years? Why is the Bible to be trusted as a source of information when major stories like Exodus have a wealth of archaeological evidence that contradict them, and accounts of miracles being performed can't be reliably corroborated by 3rd party documentation?

There's a lot of good to be gained by reading the book, its a great window into the past and a good starting guide for how to behave around other humans and conduct yourself in general.

Yes.

Right. Composed how long after Jesus? The Johannines were perhaps a separate, more mystical version of Early Christianity. Mostly, people believed this:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_influence_theory_of_atonement
Most important part to read are the common criticisms and misconceptions.

Omnipotence =/= Everything I can imagine, I can make happen. Especially if what I imagined doesn't make sense even in the realm of my imagination (isn't internally coherent).
For example: It's not possible for God to create a universe with free will and without evil, for free will necessities alternative to God. And since God is good, only alternative to Him is evil.
Similarly such paradoxical rock is impossible to create. It can't exist, ever. Not created by God, nor created by anyone else, nor just be there.
Omnipotence = Everything (omni) that can happen (is potential), I can make happen. And everything that happened, happened because of me. And everything that I've made happen, I can change or undo.
If God can't make it, no one can, it's not possible for it to ever exist.
And if God can make it, He can change and undo it, because He knows everything about its properties and how was it created.

Last sentence should say "But there's still..." not just "there's". Don't take the Bible literally, absorb it as metaphorical philosophy.

they were never blind or ill
the jews just told them they were to sell their snake oil
jesus just told them to cut it out and stop being sheeple
but instead he created even more sheeple, because being a hippy is easier than hard work

Omnipotence is the ability to do anything, imagined or not, logical or not. I reject your argument/definition that if one is omnipotent then he/she can only do what is logical. If god is truly omnipotent then he should be able to make it logically possible to make a rock so big he cannot lift it, yet still be omnipotent.

>For example: It's not possible for God to create a universe with free will and without evil

So, there are limits to god's power. He's bound by logic. He cannot do the impossible. So he cannot be omnipotent.

Yes. Reminder that even the 12 apostles were anointed with the power to heal also:

youtube.com/watch?v=AT7cnOkGcBQ

For God created everything with Wisdom and by His Word.
>Now with you is Wisdom, who knows your works
>and was present when you made the world;
>Who understands what is pleasing in your eyes
>and what is conformable with your commands.
>10 Send her forth from your holy heavens
>and from your glorious throne dispatch her
>That she may be with me and work with me,
>that I may know what is pleasing to you.
>11 For she knows and understands all things
Wisdom 9,9-11
If something was internally inconsistent, not only seemed like it is, due to falling of men's wisdom, but was incomprehensible by divine Wisdom too, it couldn't be created.
For divine Wisdom knows of all things and nothing from what is, can escape her reasoning.
So either you're correct in assuming
>it's beyond our comprehension
as spiritual answer and God can show it for being internally consistent, or it doesn't exist, for it can't exist, for it would be incomprehensible by God and that is impossible. I assume the latter.

If God would make something illogical, not only to us, for we do not possess complete reasoning, but to Himself, that would disprove His omniscience.
For He couldn't explain thing He created.

Then he is not omnipotent, as he cannot do everything, which includes doing the logically impossible.

Your argument isn't original and it's been disproved time and time again.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox

>Omnipotence =/= Everything I can imagine, I can make happen. Especially if what I imagined doesn't make sense even in the realm of my imagination (isn't internally coherent).
False. This is subordinating God to logic.

Give me the abridged version please.

It's from Aquinas, i.e. a heretic and retard.

Think about it this way. God creates everything by His Word. Kinda like writing a book, but Words in the book bind reality.
How? By the meaning of the Word. Everything is defined by Word, or couple of Words, their meaning defines nature of thing it describes.
If two Words, describing one thing, were to contradict each other, the nature of said thing would crumble. For one part of the nature would go against the other.
God cannot say: "Let this rock be unmovable by Me." and "Let Me move this rock". They cancel each other, they're internally inconsistent, or at least they very strongly appear to be.
And by deducting that way, that God creates and changes everything by His Word, he cannot ever say: "This will be impossible for Me to move". He still has the power to change His Word, just like the writer has the power to change his. He can vow: "I, God, swear on Myself, I will not move this rock" and the rock will remain unmoved, for God does not break His vows. Not because He can't, but because He would be a liar that way and He is perfectly good.

Faith heals and yes.

Just read the section called "Types of omnipotence" if you aren't going to read the whole thing.
The whole paradox issue only arises if you assume God can be illogical, but he cannot by definition be illogical because he is omniscient.

You're making my argument for me.
>God cannot say: "Let this rock be unmovable by Me." and "Let Me move this rock"

Orthodox detected.
God is omniscient, there can be nothing unexplainable to Him. And if something is explainable by Him, it only appears "against science/reason/logic" to us. For it goes against our reason, not because it is logically flawed, but because we are logically flawed/have incomplete observations.
God is not flawed and God knows and can explain everything that is created by Him.