I ate Pascal's Wafer

Don't assume that people back then were stupid. They may not have the benefit of modern materials and techniques, but basic tricks like walking on water or turning water into wine are not as complicated as some of the more sophisticated tricks they have now.

We simply don't know whether or not these tricks were possible back then. It does show that such events are not divine miracles. All it would take is to show that Jesus had the means readily available back then.

I'm with JayJay, though. Most likely he never performed these miracles in the first place. They were probably just attributed to him in order to make a more interesting mythology.

-Nick

thebeave

I disagree with the idea too. It suggests that the explanation for all the Jesus "miracles" was that Jesus was simply a street magician a la David Blaine. I don't think many, if any, Christianity skeptics really believe that is a credible possibility. By doing so, you are leading Christians to think that skeptics believe "something" happened back then and it was a real, physical Jesus with a bag of tricks. The truth of the matter is that many, if not most skeptics question even the existence of a real Jesus, and all reject the idea of him having performed or attempted miracles.

Splat

COOL! I'll try it on the kids when they get home from school!

I don't think a magician doing the Jesus show would affect many people's belief/non-belief. But it would be a GREAT effects show.

Synaesthesia

Evangelion,
What it does do it put the miracles in perspective. Despite all the exaggeration and inflation of supernatural tales over 2000 years we, with modern technology, can outdo the acts of GOD.

What it proves, as least, is what a small God christians have.

But that's not the POINT. This is not meant to prove anything, it reiterates something that we already know:

It would not surpise me in the least if Jesus pulled a few fast ones. All it takes is a clever brain and a gullible audience - high tech equipment which Jesus evidently had in abundance.

Magic is first and foremost about psycology - not technology. It's about using religious feelings, expectations, experiences to distort our perception.

The point is that we can be decieved about these sort of things, and we can be decieved very, very easily. Thus the reports of miracles in the bible are proof that humans are gullible before it is proof that God performed wonders.

BigJim

Sounds like a South Park episode:
<a href="http://www.southpark.dsl.pipex.com/scripts/scr504.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.southpark.dsl.pipex.com/scripts/scr504.shtml</a>

Edited to add:

Stan: This guy is going around doing magic tricks and saying they're miracles! My friend Kyle thinks he's totally awesome!
Jesus: You're good to bring this to my attention, Stan. Cults are a very dangerous thing.
Stan: I read in the Bible that you did miracles, too. If you could go in front of these people and do your miracles, then, they'll all see that David Blaine isn't so special.
Jesus: The miracle I'm most famous for is turning water into wine.
Stan: Can you do it agian?
Jesus: Very well. I shall perform the miracle. Behold. Here you can see ordinary water, clear, clean. Okay now, turn around. [Stan looks at Jesus quizzically. Jesus is now holding the pitcher] Er, nuh, tur- turn around. [Stan turns away and Jesus quickly switches pitchers] Uh, okay now, turn back. [Stan turns back] It is now wine!
Stan: That's it? That's how you did that trick?
Jesus: Wuh well, yeah.
Stan: That trick sucks, Jesus.
Jesus: Oh. Well, I guess it worked a little better on people 2000 years ago.

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: BigJim ]</p>

Polar Bear

Oh, I don't think that having such a wonderful magical show would somehow "prove" that Jesus was nothing more than a street magician. But it would show that people who claim that miracles occur have to go a whole lot further than just saying "I saw it happen." After all, as someone pointed out on another thread, people have seen David Copperfield saw people in half. But did that actually happen? Heck no, it was a trick.

Besides, I just like the blasphemous idea of a modern magician attempting to replicate Jesus' miracles.

Plus, with most of them, no special technology is required. David Blaine uses no 21st-century gimmick for the Balducci levitation. There is no trick to being nailed to a cross, other than suffering through it. The only thing that might require a physical gimmick is the side-piercing. Everything else would either be endurance or sleight-of-hand.

Polar Bear

Yeah, exactly!

Defiant Heretic

Actually, when people were crucified, their limbs were tied to the cross so they wouldn't fall off due to the nails ripping through their hands.

So all a magician would have to do is a fake nailing. Then they would just be held up by rope.

I ate Pascal's Wafer

Well, it is suggesting that if Jesus existed, then his so called miracles are most likely magic tricks rather than supernatural events. This is not to suggest that Jesus actually existed, but rather that his miracles can be explained if he really did exist.

You are correct. However, showing that Jesus' miracles are possible without supernatural intervention does not logically imply that the skeptic is acknowledging Jesus' existence. Basically, such a position might go as follows:

I don't believe entity 'X' existed, thus I don't believe such miracles attributed to entity 'X' happened.

That said, even if entity 'X' did exist, the miracles attributed to him are nothing more than parlor tricks. If they are nothing more than parlor tricks, then Jesus' miracles cannot be used as evidence for his divinity.

------------------

In conclusion, showing Jesus' miracles to be illusions rather than miracles does not acknowledge the existence of Jesus, but rather that such events are possible without supernatural intervention.

-Nick

Splat

Just like a game of Telephone can show that accounts of Jesus' miracles written down decades after the fact are possible even without actual events.