response 1 of 19:

Dec 19 11:41 UTC 1994

Are you saying that there are miracles in the New Testament, though?
I'm not sure I understand how you're using the terms.  How do you
distinguish between miracles and "superficial magic".

response 3 of 19:

Dec 19 15:35 UTC 1994

Maybe he could explain what he means by them?

response 5 of 19:

Dec 23 02:35 UTC 1994

How can we place a value on a miracle, or even discern what a
miracle is unless God himself told us that it was indeed a 
miracle.  I've never seen one, but then again, I would know one is I did see
it.

response 7 of 19:

Dec 25 03:02 UTC 1994

Allow me to clarify. Miracles can be defined either as a supernatural
occurrence or as an example of God's loving grace in action. What I am
trying to say is that some people look at a miracle in the old Testament
(i.e. the parting of the Red Sea) and think that since God is so great
and can do these powerful miracles, then he must exist and must be
powerful. To utilize the example of the Red Sea, the term "REd Sea"
was substituted for the "sea of Reeds" by a monk in the fifth century
A.D. who was copynig manuscripts. The Sea of Reeds is an actual river
in the Sinai Peninsula that will actually "part" when the wind blows 
hard enough. But my point is that people focus on the miracle itself
not the MEANING of the miracle. We teach our children that these miracles
are the basis of the religion. Children think "wow, that miracle is rad" 
and then begin to base their beleif on this instance. This mentality
often carries over to adults who base their beleifs of a supernatural 
occurence, but missing the most important lesson the miracles show , i.e.
God's saving grace. One of the reasons that peopel fall out of the church
is not becasue they disagree with the doctrine. They fall out becasue 
they become pragmatic adults and begin to doubt the possibility of the miracle

response 9 of 19:

Dec 27 22:14 UTC 1994

greg, I would say "no". Here is why: why would god lie to you?

response 11 of 19:

Jan 2 04:46 UTC 1995

greg, trying to start a religion is like trying to  start a company.
Beleive it or not, people "sell" each other on religious beleifs. How
did the early Christians/Buddhists/Muslims become what they were.
The early teachers of this religion would say, "god exists. We know 
becasue he delivered us from  Sumerian chariots" The essence of the question
is: What do you base your beleif on initially? It is not the intricate dogma,
but Stories. You are exactly right when you say we are too human. Our caveman
ancestors saw fire and were amazed. The same thing has happened and will
continue to happen as long as these religions exist. My pint is that:  the
bible has context- learn it. :)

response 13 of 19:

Jul 5 18:19 UTC 1995

I think one of the main points about miracles in the Bible is that 
although they show the nature God, they also show the nature of man.
 
Every miracle in the Torah whether it be the Red Sea, pillars of cloud
and fire, manna, plagues, prophesy, etc., just show really the 
need for mans nature to be redeemed.

As the miracle would occur, the Israelites would praise and worship
back to their idol worship, murmuring, and other signs of 
unbelief and what God deemed abomination.

The prophets later told of the greatest miracle of God to 
occur sometime in their future.

In speaking of Jesus they also prophesised that few also
would believe in His time.

In speaking about those who wouldnt believe, Jesus maintained 
the fact that even if they, with their own eyes, saw one raised 
from the dead, they would still deny the Lord. They would not repent.

response 15 of 19:

Jan 18 20:06 UTC 1996

I definately believe in god, but only really in the context of a word that
answers unanswerable questions.  I think the bible is incredible interesting,
but I've never even considered taking it litarally, I am perfectly happy to
belive in all those stories as alagory meant to teach us something important.
Whether the miracles that are written about happened or not I don't feel any
need to rationalize them, because if you can take them for what they are and
for what they accomplished both at the time of their supposed happenings and
their effect on history it doesn't really matter what the scientific
rationalizations are.  If you do believe in the bible litterally then it
shouldn't be necessary to put human logic to it, because if you believe in
an all powerful God then human logic isn't enough to understand how the
miracles worked.  If you believe in a God that actually created the heavens
and the earth that we live on, specifically in seven days with a completely
new piece on each day then is there any point at all in believing that these
things couldn't happen?

response 17 of 19:

Jan 29 19:32 UTC 1996

I think I heard about a feminist bible that is fairly new, but there are so
many translations around that it would be strange if there wasn't.

response 19 of 19:

Mar 6 03:05 UTC 1996

I've heard of several new editions of teh bible using only non-gender-specific
terms, as well as a modernization of teh language.  Which is really sad, when
you think about it--the bible is some of the best poetry in all of western
literature, and to alter it like that, while it may be "politically correct",
is certainly not a good idea.
"Our parent, who is in heaven, your name is sacred...."  
It just doesn't work...