*Alward: Inserting Miracles (to Kornform)
JAlw@aol.com JAlw@aol.com
Wed, 4 Nov 1998 17:05:05 EST (00910238705, a4ed00a8.3640cf91@aol.com)
In a message dated 98-11-04 14:07:16 EST, you write:
<< Subj: *Alward: Inserting Miracles (to Kornform)
Date: 98-11-04 14:07:16 EST
From: mbkbell@aapi.co.uk (Matthew Bell)
Sender: owner-errancy@infidels.org
To: errancy@infidels.org
----------
> From: JAlw@aol.com
> To: errancy@infidels.org
> Subject: *Alward: Inserting Miracles (to Kornform)
> Date: 04 November 1998 17:21
>
> In a message dated 98-11-04 07:53:20 EST, you write:
>
> << In the
> blood problem you insert an arbitrary miracle to "solve" the problem of
the
> magicians performing a like act when it was theretofore impossible to do
so.
> In the Judas problem an arbitrary miracle can be inserted (in like manner
> :-))
> to "solve" the second theretofore impossible death of Judas.
>
> Can't you see the exact similarity of ad hoc reasoning in both cases? >>
> ===================
> Joe Alward:
>
> I DO insert a miracle, but it is not as "arbitrary" as you may think. In
> saying that the author didn't tell us that Aaron reversed his
trick--although
> context of the plague stories makes it clear that he would have HAD to have
> done so, I am not presenting a new, unprecedented act; Aaron had performed
the
> same miracle a minute before.
>
> If, as Bell apparently is thinking of doing, we were to claim that God just
> reversed the blood back to water at the end of Exodus 7:25, then that would
be
> truly ARBITRARY. With that kind of reasoning, almost ANY problem story
could
> be harmonized. Thus, my "miracle" is more consistent with context, and is
not
> a new type of miracle; it does not come as a complete surprise, as would
> Bell's.
M.BELL
Don't presume to understand my or CCBE's thinking. We have not postulated
that
God reversed the blood back to water at the end of 7:25. There are many
points
of the passage which have not yet been fully considered. I suggest you await
such rather than presuming knowledge of what that will be.
>
=======================
Joe Alward:
Ouch. My apologies. I was going by I thought Jeff Epler posted:
"CCBE's proposed resolution to the second issue is that as the plague was
supernatural in origin, its end could also be supernatural in origin.
Thus, no sediments would be present when the plague ended---all the blood
was miracled away."
I definitely don't want to attribute to you something you didn't say. I've
experienced enough of that myself.
> I've said before that the weakest part of my harmonization is the failure of
> the author to tell us that each contestant reversed his trick. However, as
> far as I can tell, my harmonization removes all questions. Bell's not only
has
> the problem of introducing a miracle which was not only not mentioned by
the
> author, but which was also completely arbitrary; furthermore, it still
leaves
> the unanswered the question of where the magicians found water to convert.
Do
> you think Bell's explanation is superior to mine? If not, then shouldn't
> errantists' attention shift toward mine?