Okay, so there's this guy, who thinks that Jesus didn't really walk on water, but that he was actually walking on a floating piece of ice.
Jesus may have walked on ice, scientists speculate
The scientists note that Galilee has warm, salty springs along the western shore, an area Jesus frequented. The water above the springs does not convect when it is cold. If air temperatures fell below freezing, ice could have formed thick enough to support human weight. From a distance, the scientists suggested, a person on the ice might appear to be walking on water.
hmm...
This is an odd story. I mean, right on the face of it, it assumes that everything about the Biblical account is 100% true, except that the witnesses were simply too dumb to tell the difference between someone walking on water and someone just standing on a floating piece of ice. That seems an odd perspective to take. That's like saying that the pillar of fire witnessed by the Isrealites in their wandering in the desert was actually a natural gas geyser that had been ignited by a bolt of lightning, and that it appeared to move around due to unusual air currents.
Now, I do find it interesting to speculate on ways that miraculous things could have been caused by natural processes, (which, by the way, does not necessarily mean that they aren't miracles in my opinion,) but this one just seems kind of silly. I mean, maybe Jesus
did attend the wedding and did
appear to turn water into wine, but all that
really happened was that there were some grapes that had fallen into the well and began to ferment and nobody noticed because they ususually use a different well and decided to open this one up just for the wedding party because they had all the extra people there.
I am a Christian, and that's based on faith and some personal experiences that I've had. I also tend to be a skeptical person towards supposed "miracles". Especially those modern ones like the virgin Mary appearing on a grilled cheese sandwich and so on. To some extent, my faith and my skepticism could be seen as contradictory, and you know what, I'm comfortable with that. I don't know what really happened back then. To be sure, walking on water or turning water to wine or whatever are not things that happen very often. If I heard someone claiming to have seen that happen today, I would be really skeptical. Because I believe in the divinity of Christ, I grant stories about him some extra leeway.
Still, it seems to me that if you are inclined to be skeptical and
not grant him that leeway, going all the way to the point where Jesus and the deciples were all there in the boat and that everything else in the story happened just the way it says in the Bible, but that he wasn't
really walking on water, but just ice, and that they couldn't tell the difference? Doesn't it seem more likely that someone would have just made it up altogether before they would have made a mistake like that? Doesn't assuming that all the miracles were really just optical illusions or tricks speak pretty poorly of the intelligence of the people back then? I mean, to me, the way that story reads in the Bible, the ice is not a satisfactory explanation.
Okay, so I just thought that was a little weird.
.