First things first: I like what you say about how a person who’s been blind won’t understand what he sees when he can see. Regardless of my (lack of) beliefs, I enjoyed reading that interpretation.
But, considering I am an atheist, of course this story sounds like nonsense to me when taken literal. My first question would be one that I’ve asked before, although that concerned a different miracle: why would Jesus/God do this? Why would he heal someone, but not many, many others?
My second question: Why don’t you find this particular story silly, but you scoff at sonship’s “other worlds” comment? Because to me both stories sound ridicules, without any basis in reality. How do you discriminate between “truth” and “nonsense” when both stories are... let’s call it “unbelievable”?
-Removed-Interesting ... I note that the 21st century KJV gives verse 26 as:
26 And He sent him away to his house, saying, “Neither go into the town, nor tell it to any in the town.”
Why do you suppose that Jesus didn't want the miracle to be known to the people of the town? Or was there another motivation?
Originally posted by Great King Rat
First things first: I like what you say about how a person who’s been blind won’t understand what he sees when he can see. Regardless of my (lack of) beliefs, I enjoyed reading that interpretation.
But, considering I am an atheist, of course this story sounds like nonsense to me when taken literal. My first question would be one that I’ve asked bef ...[text shortened]... scriminate between “truth” and “nonsense” when both stories are... let’s call it “unbelievable”?
Sheldon: More wrong? Wrong is an absolute state and not subject to gradation.
Stuart: Of course it is. It’s a little wrong to say a tomato is a vegetable, it’s very wrong to say it’s a suspension bridge.
1 edit
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Interesting ... I note that the 21st century KJV gives verse 26 as:26 And He sent him away to his house, saying, “Neither go into the town, nor tell it to any in the town.”
Why do you suppose that Jesus didn't want the miracle to be known to the people of the town? Or was there another motivation?
Why do you suppose that Jesus didn't want the miracle to be known to the people of the town? Or was there another motivation?
Jesus may have wanted the man to be saved from his own weakness for boasting. There are other times when Jesus told someone to keep a blessing done to them private. And they did not listen.
It could also be that the people of the town would sow doubt, unbelief, skepticism into the blessed man causing him to doubt WHO Jesus was.
Actually, that is a pretty good question you have there.
It is believed that the Apostle Paul had spectacular things done with him from God which he kept to himself for as long as fourteen years. At the appropriate time he felt the freedom to speak of these things. He spoke of these matters in his second letter to the Corinthians - things which he held private for 14 years.
Man's tendency is often to not be able to constrain himself from bragging.
But Jesus did not just want to recover the man's physical body, but every part of his soul as well.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemBelieving there are other worlds out there with beings that will learn from the mistakes of other beings - including humans - is more wrong than believing a man will spit in a blind man's eye making him see again?Sheldon: More wrong? Wrong is an absolute state and not subject to gradation.
Stuart: Of course it is. It’s a little wrong to say a tomato is a vegetable, it’s very wrong to say it’s a suspension bridge.
Nope.
1 edit
-Removed-"Mark 8:23 And he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw ought. And he took..."
"Our Lord's action here is most significant, Having abandoned Bethsaida to judgment Matthew 11:12-24 . He would neither heal in that village, nor permit further testimony to be borne there Mark 8:26 . The probation of Bethsaida as a community was ended, but He would still show mercy to individuals. Cf Revelation 3:20."
http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/scofield-reference-notes/mark/mark-8.html
Hope Bible Scholar Scofield's comments shed light on the passage.
-Removed-This is further reinforced by the next few verses:
27 And Jesus went out with His disciples into the towns of Caesarea Philippi; and on the way He asked His disciples, saying unto them, “Who do men say that I am?”
28 And they answered, “John the Baptist; but some say Elijah, and others, one of the prophets.”
29 And He said unto them, “But whom say ye that I am?” And Peter answered and said unto Him, “Thou art the Christ.”
30 And He charged them that they should tell no man of Him.
Originally posted by Great King RatI think so. Healing the eyes of the blind is something we can actually do today. The other is just something invented out of thin air.
Believing there are other worlds out there with beings that will learn from the mistakes of other beings - including humans - is more wrong than believing a man will spit in a blind man's eye making him see again?
Nope.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemThe Pharisees might want to stone him for dealing in witchcraft and associating with the ruler of the demons. The following happened at another time.
Interesting ... I note that the 21st century KJV gives verse 26 as:26 And He sent him away to his house, saying, “Neither go into the town, nor tell it to any in the town.”
Why do you suppose that Jesus didn't want the miracle to be known to the people of the town? Or was there another motivation?
After the demon was cast out, the mute man spoke; and the crowds were amazed, and were saying, "Nothing like this has ever been seen in Israel." But the Pharisees were saying, "He casts out the demons by the ruler of the demons."
(Matthew 9:33-34 NASB)