Did Jesus walk on water? Or ice?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JSmitty2005
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I heard some commentary on EWTN radio Friday about this. The most likely answer is: If ice was common, why was the story recorded at all? Jesus did plenty of miracles, why record a “non-miracle” at all if it takes away from the credibility of the other miracle?

Personally, the writer must not have been a sailor. If the ice was solid, the boat would not have been moving. If it was just chunks floating around, then Jesus ould have sank under his own weight as the surface tension would be insuficient to suppport him.

Finallly, I think that the water was probably choppy and the story was not “Jesus surfing on the Sea of Gailee on Ice”.

Ice on the Sea of Gailee, sure thats possible. But not this time.

Just another attempt by the secular media to throw dis-credit
 
Give me a break!!! What’s wrong with believing that Jesus walked on water because He is GOD!!!

Does every miracle have to have a scientific explanation? It wouldn’t be a miracle - or is that your point?
 
Personally I believe that, as Jesus is God, He definitely could have walked on water just as he worked the miracle of the loaves and fishes, brought dead people back to life, and rose into the air at the Ascension.

I suppose some scientist is now going to come up with a theory about thermal currents that possibly happened once in a blue moon, and could account for how He ascended into Heaven.
 
I think it is no accident that right before Easter we see storys that are meant to test Faith.Jesus really walked on ice,judas was really doing what he was told,John was a Messiah too,James was the real rock,the davinci code etc.Trust in the Lord and his Church,Pray and shut that t.v. off.
 
Eileen T:
just as he worked the miracle of the loaves and fishes, brought dead people back to life, and rose into the air at the Ascension.
Click to expand...
Didn’t you know that He just showed them how to share, that those people weren’t *really * dead, and that the Ascension was just a myth that the Apostles came up with to give themselves credibility? C’mon, everyone knows that! :rolleyes: 😉
 
JSmitty2005,thanks for putting that link in your sig.I just checked out the site and it looks very good for newer Catholics.God Bless.

Frank
 
Jesus greatest miracle is forgiveness of sin. And He passed that on to His priests.

Just think, he can heal you but you will die anyway. He forgives your sins (In persona) and you get to live with Him forever. Thats a real miracle.
 
40.png
franksv:
JSmitty2005,thanks for putting that link in your sig.I just checked out the site and it looks very good for newer Catholics.God Bless.

Frank
Click to expand...
No prob. Take care. 🙂
 
So Jesus was actually walking barefoot on a piece of ice on a stormy, windy sea? I think only a person who has never actually walked on ice could come up with such an explanation. 😃
 
Ted CharlotteNC:
I heard some commentary on EWTN radio Friday about this. The most likely answer is: If ice was common, why was the story recorded at all? Jesus did plenty of miracles, why record a “non-miracle” at all if it takes away from the credibility of the other miracle?

Personally, the writer must not have been a sailor. If the ice was solid, the boat would not have been moving. If it was just chunks floating around, then Jesus ould have sank under his own weight as the surface tension would be insuficient to suppport him.

Finallly, I think that the water was probably choppy and the story was not “Jesus surfing on the Sea of Gailee on Ice”.

Ice on the Sea of Gailee, sure thats possible. But not this time.

Just another attempt by the secular media to throw dis-credit
Click to expand...

It’s a fair point, I think.​

Several of the miracles may not be miracles at all - such as the treatment of the epileptic boy. Epilepsy is not caused by demons, but by damage to the brain; the evangelists had no way of knowing this, so a seeming miracle is treated as a genuine miracle. But even something that was mistakenly interpreted as a miracle, can be used to make a valid and important point about Jesus.

Totting up a tally of miracles says nothing about the significance of Jesus - otherwise, any saint who worked more miracles than He did would be more significant than He is; which is absurd. He doesn’t lose anything by not having worked as many miracles as supposed. The point at issue is whether a particular act is miraculous, and, what a particular act (or word) tells us about Him.

So with the walking on the water - there is nothing wrong in suggesting that it was not a miracle; the status of Jesus does not change by one iota. If it was an entirely natural occurrence, and can be explained as such, fair enough.

If it were being explained by postulating the agency of UFOs - which is one explanation of the feeding of the five thousand - that would be a different story; because there’s no reason to explain an obscure thing like a miracle by an even more obscure thing like an UFO. A miracle which can be accounted by entirely natural causes, is not in that position.

So if the walking on the water can be accounted for by entirely natural causes (it is not called a miracle, after all; that it was, may be no more than the readers’ opinion), to do so, seems entirely legitimate. ##
 
JSmitty2005 said:
msnbc.msn.com/id/12152740/ :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Let’s see …

… how thick does ice have to be to support a man’s weight?

… how long does it take to freeze to that thickness?

… how long does it take under the marginal freezing conditions that would keep the saltier water around the boat liquid?

… what sane man would risk his neck walking out some miles from shore on ice that he has never seen the likes of before? (The article I read said that the phenomenon was estimated to happen once every 30 to 180 years.)

… what sane man would do this in a storm?

… what about Peter getting out of the boat and walking on the “water”?

If this is the best that rationalism can do, give me Catholic doctrine any day.
  • Liberian
 
There was a similar debate on another site I post on. Its funny how the media is coming out with this stuff now…Im my mind, this is an attempt by Satan to attempt to confuse us.
 
Several of the miracles may not be miracles at all - such as the treatment of the epileptic boy. Epilepsy is not caused by demons, but by damage to the brain; the evangelists had no way of knowing this, so a seeming miracle is treated as a genuine miracle. But even something that was mistakenly interpreted as a miracle, can be used to make a valid and important point about Jesus.
Click to expand...
Code: 
  How many cases of epilepsy have been cured by somebody just simply giving a command? Matthew 8:28. “When he reached the country of Gadarenes on the other side, two demoniacs (or was it a coincidence that they both had epilepsy) came towards him out of the tombs—creatures so fierce that no one could pass that way.  They stood there shouting. ‘What do you want with us, Son of God.  Have you come here to torture us before the time?’ (How many incidents have there been of two epileptics walking around shouting “What do you want with us, Son of God?”)…..And he said to them ‘Go then and they came out'…." Medically or scientifically explain this please.
How many cases of blindness have been cured by somebody spitting on the ground and making mud and rubbing it on the eyes of a person? Oh, yeah, maybe this man just had too much sleep in his eyes that they were shut close and Jesus just simply wiped the sleep from his eyes.
Code: 
 How many cases of paralysis have been cured by somebody telling that person to stand up and walk? Maybe this man just got a cramp may years before and was simply afraid to walk and Jesus convinced him that there was nothing wrong and using psycholgy convinced him to stand up and walk.
How many cases of hemorrhaging have been cured by somebody telling them that their faith have saved them, and etc., and etc.,? Maybe this woman just didnt have sense enough to change her underwear and it was dirty and had a bad case of diaper rash.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top