John A. Broussard

I'm not sure I approve of your comments re Ron Wyatt. He's something of a culture hero as far as I am concerned. For years he made the most blatant claims about his discoveries, and Christians just loved him.

I have the feeling that in many instances he was pushing to see how absurd his claims could become before even the most gullible would begin to wonder.

Evidently, though his star has fallen far, there are some who still cling to this false prophet--no matter what. A book should be written about him. Amazing character!

I'm looking around for some sites where he is still regarded as genuine, but haven't found any. If you know of any, I'd appreciate references.

patchy

This...is someone you could actually look up to?
You're essentially admitting he's a fraudulent liar-- yet you object to that same description from an earlier poster?

John A. Broussard

I admit I do have a weakness for scoundrels, especially when they are so openly and obviously such. P. T. Barnum was always one of my favorites.

The bottom line is that they shouldn't go inflicting bodily harm on anyone else. If they want to make fools of the gullible, that's something else.

Celsus

You haven't heard of Wyatt Archaeological Research? Just a few weeks ago, a couple of nutters came in defending him. One enormous waste of bandwidth can be found here.

Joel

John A. Broussard

Oops! I asked the wrong question. I was looking for a fundie site that still believes in Wyatt. I've been to the first one you mention. It's driven by capitalism and not by faith--t-shirts, mugs and placemat sort of things.

I'll check that second site in a minute.

Thanks for reply.

John A. Broussard

PHEW!!!

I checked it out and I'm exhausted. What a hodgepodge!! I also take back what I said. Evidently there are still plenty of people out there who think Ron Wyatt is a font of wisdom.

Skeptical

Just wanted to point out that many of the "miracles" of Jesus weren't all that miraculous anyway, particularly the healings. Faith healing is a real phenomena, but the "magic" is in the mind of the healed, not the hands of the healer.

Experiements have been done with remote prayer. They show that when a person who believes in the healing power of prayer thinks a healer is praying for them, they tend to get better regardless if someone is actually praying for them or not. Ergo, the healing takes place in their own heads. Other studies show that often people _think_ they have been healed and actually feel much better for a while and their symptoms may dissipate, but their illness isn't actually healed at all.

So as far as the healings go, those aren't all that spectacular even if there is a kernel of fact behind them.

This idea is interestingly alluded to in Mark:

"He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. 6And he was amazed at their lack of faith" Mark 6:5-7 (NIV)

Notice how the passage is "softened" by starting out saying definitively that he could do no miracles there, but then giving an exception which may be a later scribal alteration.

Matthew softens it even further:

"And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith" Matthew 13:58 (NIV)

Now the miracles are "not many", instead of laying of hands on "a few".

In Luke this passage is missing entirely.

I have always found this interesting since it is a rare glimpse into a window of what may have been a kernel of fact ultimately obscured by multitudes of theological overlay.

Craigart14

In other words, psychosomatic illnesses might be cured or that the mind can temporarily mask symptoms. Faith healing is an illusion, much like the placebo effect. Of course, a lot of it is just plain hucksterism.

Craig

Diogenes the Cynic

According to John Crossan, "healings" were spiritual rituals that were not the same as literally curing physical ailments.

John A. Broussard

You (or John Crossan) lost me on this one. Healings don't really heal?

Where can I find out more about Crossan. Fascinating notion.