Apparently, Just One More Parlor Trick

Luke

• 13:10 And he was teaching in one of the synagogues on the sabbath.
  ​
• 13:11 And, behold, there was a woman which had a spirit of infirmity eighteen years, and was bowed together, and could in no wise lift up [herself].
  ​
• 13:12 And when Jesus saw her, he called [her to him], and said unto her, Woman, thou art loosed from thine infirmity.
  ​
• 13:13 And he laid [his] hands on her: and immediately she was made straight, and glorified God.
  ​
• 13:14 And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation, because that Jesus had healed on the sabbath day, and said unto the people, There are six days in which men ought to work: in them therefore come and be healed, and not on the sabbath day.
  ​
• 13:15 The Lord then answered him, and said, [Thou] hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the sabbath loose his ox or [his] ass from the stall, and lead [him] away to watering?
  ​
• 13:16 And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day?
  ​
• 13:17 And when he had said these things, all his adversaries were ashamed: and all the people rejoiced for all the glorious things that were done by him

Noted by Robert Price, this seems to me a fascinating, and clearly contrived, piece of self-serving Midrash on the part of Luke. On the one hand, he seems to demonstrate an embarrassing ignorance of Halakhah - I can think of no reason why anyone would take issue with what 'Jesus' did. On the other hand, and perhaps more relevent, Luke inadvertently displays an equally embarrssing backwardness: Luke's world of magic and exorcism, someone could miraculously cure an 18-year-old infirmity generating the slightest sense of awe or fear or amazement ... not even mild surprise. Clearly, those were the good old days.{Added blank lines, to separate things - Adminnemooseus}[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 03-12-2004]

I just like how Luke writes about some Jewish things, when he was a gentile.

I like this parlour trick highlighted by Thomas Woolston Discourse on the Miracles, in view of the present controversy between infidels and apostates London 1729. page 55Of the blind man, for whom eyesalve was made of clay and spittle; which eyesalve; whether it was Balsamick or not, does not equally affect the credit of the miracle. If it was naturally medicinal, there's an end of the miracle; and if it was not medicinal, it was foolishly and impertinently apply'd, and can be no otherwise accounted for than by considering it, with the Fathers, was a figurative act in Jesus. What reason can Jesus have for mixing clay with his spit and applying it to the man's eyes other than simple entertainment value?Surely the Son of God could cure that man's blindness with a single thought, why go through the Copperfield routine?Jesus must have been in big demand for children's parties and the opening of new bazaars, his party tricks probably provided him with a fairly comfortable living.Brian.

Seems obvious to me; according to the Player's Handbook, divine spells (like Remove Blindness) have material components, just like arcane spells. Clearly the Son of God is at least a 9th-level cleric (minimum level to cast "Raise Dead") who didn't take the metamagic feats to cast "Remove Blindness" without the somatic, verbal, and material components. Not to mention dungeon crawling. Every party needs a cleric!

Maybe even a part of him like spit could heal. Remember the woman who merely touched his garment and was healed?It's called a point of contact. If God can make a man from the dust of the ground, how much more can he make this possible? In the same way I could ask, why did God choose to make the heavens and earth in six days when he could have made it with a single thought. People think six days is short, this is all relative Brian. Deary me...such doubt. Sometimes Jesus would say such things as "get up and walk". But why do you question such things? These aren't surely your reasons for unbelief?Some people say they would need to see God or a miracle in order to believe, parlour tricks etc. And some people require a sign when they need it not, obviously I'll count you as not one of these people.Clearly, you are now never going to say hypocritically that you would need God to do something for you to believe, for isn't the healing more important oh crafty ones?

Hello CA :The Jews did take issue of what was done. The text also tells their reasons; that it was done on the Sabbath. Luke recorded the events the way it happened. Your proclivity to use the text to conclude the reverse of what the text was written to communicate evidences the filter of your worldview. Pilate himself said the Jews delivered up Jesus out of "envy".If Jesus performed a trick then this makes both He and Luke deceivers/liars/frauds. Where on Earth does the notion that Jesus was a "good and wise " teacher come from ?

Willowtree, do you know anything about Halakhah - about Jewish Law. If not, please don't presume to teach others.Do you truly believe the Israeli health profession simply shuts down on Shabbas? While the prohibitions surrounding Shabbat are both varied and complex, there is absolutely nothing which prohibits healing per se. Now stop embarrassing yourself. (1) Perhaps it's just a Lucan story.(2) Gullible cherrypickers with no fondness for fig trees and no belief in the Infancy Gospels?[This message has been edited by ConsequentAtheist, 03-30-2004]

Hello CA :If the truth is on your side then I think there is a little too much anger in this response.Do you know what phylacteries are ?Do you know what the Pharisees/Jews did to circumvent the Law and travel on the Sabbath ?Of course you do, then you also know that Pharisees/Jewry, by their traditions, kept the letter of the Law but violated the spirit.
"....who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel".CA :Would you, without using scripture, substantiate what exactly is a parlor trick ?Then, transfer what you produce and overlay it upon the passages of scripture cited in Post 1 ?IF a parlor is a controlled environment specially prepared to deceive,
then isn't a public setting the most unlikely place to pull off such a stunt/trick/deception ?

You mistake contempt for anger. Having watched you demonstrate a rather pathetic ignorance of Jewish Law, you'll understand why I might find your perspective worthless at best and repugnant at worst.Rather than diverting this discussion with references to phylacteries, rather than your ignorant and antisemitic dismissal of the Tannaim, simply point out where Halakhah prohibits healing on Shabbat.[This message has been edited by ConsequentAtheist, 03-30-2004]

It doesn't....thats the point. This is why Jesus continually called them on this nonsense. This is why Jesus shamed them by pointing out that they would pull their mule out of a ditch on the Sabbath but condemn Him for healing a daughter of Abraham.What I respect about your position is that you take sides clearly.
Luke is either a liar/fraud OR he is telling the truth - nothing in between.Pharisees hated Jesus and even Pilate recognized that they delivered Him up out of envy. IF Jewry could miss the placement of Enoch into their canon and include Solomonic works, then it is no stretch to believe they also missed the Messiah.I believe you still owe me a response to the latter portion of my previous reply/response.

So your position is that the Pharisees were upset because Jesus did something that does not profane Shabbat? You are either exceptionally dishonest or exceptionally confused - clearly you are exceedingly gullible. As I said, you are exceedingly gullible. You also paint with a wide, antisemitic brush. You might find this of interest, but I doubt it, given that you seem so comfortable with your particulary Christian brand of bigotry. You believe a number of silly things.

I particpated respectfully and simply disagreed with your implication that Luke is a liar/fraud, and all you can do is go to the extreme of branding me a antisemite.Where is the antisemitism CA ?You have set yourself on this "high-don't-challenge-me-horse". As if nobody else knows anything about Jewry.Where is the antisemitism in my position ?You were the one who desecrated Holy Writ by the implications of post 1 and no theist said a thing about that.Antisemitism means I have hated Jewry for no other reason other than the fact that they are Jews. What are you talking about ?I have participated in a perfectly acceptable manner. You played the race card at the drop of a hat, which was meant to deflect away from my pointy and uncomfortable arguments.....in that much you have succeeded.You have completely ignored the section of post about parlor tricks...I wonder why ?Our dance is over due to your hatred of Evangelicals.I challenge anyone to SHOW me the antisemitism in anything I wrote, then by the same standard/criteria judge what CA wrote.Willowtree.

Do CA and WT have a history? The way this skirmish escalated so quickly makes we wonder. I can't even tell if the original topic is still under discussion, or even what the original topic was, yet another argument for clear thread titles.My sense is that CA is being overly and unnecessarily aggressive, but like I said, perhaps there's a history I'm unaware of. Anyway, if the thread can't maintain a constructive course, the alternatives are to move the thread to FFA, or to close it.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Administrator

I've been concerned about the outcroppings of "militant atheism", by CA and others. I personally would prefer that "militant Christian fundementalism" and such not be confronted with equal but opposite extremism.

quote:

---

Anyway, if the thread can't maintain a constructive course, the alternatives are to move the thread to FFA, or to close it.

---

In general I'm against moving good topics gone bad (or bad topics gone good), to the FFA. I prefer just to close such topics. But this one seems to have been FFA material right from the beginning.

quote:

---

I can't even tell if the original topic is still under discussion, or even what the original topic was, yet another argument for clear thread titles.

---

These sort of issues are things I'm trying to work out, at both "Retire Free For All Forum?" and "Dealing with waste of time threads and their posters...".In the shorter term, I am considering pushing for a short term freeze on the starting of new topics, other than in the "Short Term" forum. Lately we sure seem to have been piling up a lot of new redundant and/or low quality topics, along with some high quality topics.But all this should go to the "Change in Moderation?" topic, or one of the above cited.Adminnemooseus

---

Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads

Very well.