Thursday, August 17, 2006

More on "walking trees", the science of miracles

Following on from my post below, I have found, via this blog, that yet another writer has made the same point about the miracle at Bethsaida. This time it is "D Keith Mano", who is apparently quite a well-known writer and associated with prominent conservative American magazine, National Review. Here is his article, entitled "The Bethsaida miracle - Jesus healing a blind man." Here is a quote:

" But, at Bethsaida, something quite different came about: a miracle that depends on science for its proof, that cannot be understood except by adducing modern medical data --quite unknown in 30 A.D. -- as evidence. And, when one miracle has been proved, it then at once becomes not just possible, but probable, that another miracle can also be proved true. "

Mr Mano makes the same point as Mr Grigg. I should clarify my earlier post by stating that, although I wrote about two New Testament miracles involving Christ curing blindness in my own article, I did not make explicit the point that Messrs Grigg and Mano have both made: namely how impressively believable the New Testament account of the miracle at Bethsaida has become in modern times, because of our modern understanding of the nature of vision and perception.



This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?