Professor Doron Nof of Florida State University has claimed that Jesus didn't walk on water after all - apparently there was an ice formation on the Sea of Galilee and he walked on that instead!
Now this is rather silly. Is he trying to claim that Jesus was walking on ice, and:
It would be much simpler for Professor Nof to simply claim that this was a legand, and never part of the historical Jesus. Instead he is trying to argue that the event happened, but just wasn't a miracle.
Very unlikely I'm afraid. The disciples knew that people do not just walk on water, and consequently couldn't understand how Jesus was doing it.
Professor Nof's explanation is simply wrong.
Now this is rather silly. Is he trying to claim that Jesus was walking on ice, and:
- The ice was extremely isolated so that the boat that the disciples were in could still be "buffeted by the waves" (Mt 14:25).
- The disciples failed to notice that Jesus was walking on the ice instead of water, and thought he was a ghost walking above the water.
- Peter managed to get out of the boat (buffeted by waves), walk on those waves until he panicked, when he then sunk (until Jesus caught him).
It would be much simpler for Professor Nof to simply claim that this was a legand, and never part of the historical Jesus. Instead he is trying to argue that the event happened, but just wasn't a miracle.
Very unlikely I'm afraid. The disciples knew that people do not just walk on water, and consequently couldn't understand how Jesus was doing it.
Professor Nof's explanation is simply wrong.
Comments
The most plausible non-miracle explanation I've had for this was that it was essentially an error in translation. The original greek said "walked by the water". This lost gospel was re-told by someone else, whose greek was not as good, and so the story was elaborated into "on the water."This is based on the idea that the gospels we have now are actually retellings by others, rather than by the original writers. I think it was Don Mills who was eplaining it to me, and it was some years ago. :)
This sounds very implausible to me. The walking on water episode is contained in several of the gospels - two of the gospel writers were present at the time (Matthew and John), and another (Mark) wrote a lot of his from Peter's account (who was also present).Given the large number of copies of these gospels that we have, a minor transposition error seems unlikely here (there are known transposition errors - these are generally easily identified as there is a minor difference between manuscripts).However, I think what clinches it is that none of the story makes sense if Jesus was walking by the water, instead of on the water. First of all, the disciples probably wouldn't have noticed him (they were in the middle of a storm trying to keep their boat afloat). Secondly, they wouldn't have thought he was a ghost, and thirdly, Peter wouldn't have got out of the boat to walk on the water as well. Basically a transposition error does not make sense here - you really have to argue that the entire story is a myth instead.Furthermore, the only case when you really need to argue against this is if you have already determined that miracles are impossible. If Jesus was the Son of God, then walking on water is not a problem. If you are not convinced that Jesus is the Son of God, then this is not where I would start for evidence of miracles.There is far greater evidence for the resurrection of Jesus than for Jesus walking on water. That is where to start - once that has been established, the miraculous is no longer a problem, and so the only real objection to the walking on water episode disappears.
All I know about Jesus walking on water is how it has helped me. Firstly if I ever get into situations and problems I find hard to deal with. I find if I take them to God in prayer and focus on Christ, I can walk on the 'waters' However if I brood on the problem and keep focusing on the problem, I find I sink under the troubled waters.So I know I learned a wonderful lesson from Peters experience with Christ.
People would rather have a scientific explanation, than rather just accept the truth, that God is God, and nothing is impossible with God.
The Bible specifically talks about people who are wise in there own eyes, become as fools. God created our science, He is a Spirit (Eternal Spirit), therefore you cannot explain the Supernatural workings of God in the natural.
Just as no one can explain how God has No Begining, He is the Great I AM...
All religions are made by man
Christianity is Not a religion,
but a way of life with the True Living God. The Bible is Gods Word to humans that we may turn to Him through His Son Jesus Christ, the Living True God. The Great I AM...
Father Son HolySpirit, the Great I AM...
People would rather have a scientific explanation, than rather just accept the truth, that God is God, and nothing is impossible with God.
The Bible specifically talks about people who are wise in there own eyes, become as fools. God created our science, He is a Spirit (Eternal Spirit), therefore you cannot explain the Supernatural workings of God in the natural.
Just as no one can explain how God has No Begining, He is the Great I AM...
All religions are made by man
Christianity is Not a religion,
but a way of life with the True Living God. The Bible is Gods Word to humans that we may turn to Him through His Son Jesus Christ, the Living True God. The Great I AM...
Father Son HolySpirit, the Great I AM...