The Bible God, the Law Breaker

[POI]

God is claimed to break "natural law" all the time, by walking on water, turning water into wine, raising the rotting dead, turning humans into salt, etc...

For Debate: Does God break all "law", or just some "law"? And if only some, why only some, and not all? Further, what is the point of breaking some "law", and not others? Or maybe, God breaks all "laws", which is why the Bible is illogical, immoral, and defies later human discovery?

Before you answer, a running theme is expressed among many theists... When a skeptic asks a theist, 'can God do anything?", the theist might respond with, "God can only do what is logically possible and/or what is in his moral nature". In essence, God strictly abides by some "law", but not others? By "law", I'm referencing natural law, the laws of logic, moral law, mathematics, and any others I may have missed. I trust you get the gist...?

[POI]

Science demonstrates that modern people don't know how to walk on water. It does not demonstrate that it could not be possible for a person who has better understanding of the nature.

IS it possible for humans to break 'natural law'? Yes or no. If yes, please explain how?

Yes, when the natural law is just man made idea that can be wrong.

In other words, what is the point of god only breaking 'natural law', but not other 'laws'?

If God breaks some natural law, I think it shows the law is not correct and true, doesn't really exist.

If God doesn't brake some other law, I believe it is because no good reason to do so.

1) Your response continues to conflict within itself. For clarity, was the claim of Jesus walking on water the result of him (breaking 'law' <or> not)? Same question goes for raising the rotting dead?

2) Further, these 'laws' are not man made, as we did not 'create' them. We merely identify them and understand the limitations of them. These laws existed before we discovered and 'labeled' them.

3) Okay, so you are saying he won't break them. What reason(s) won't he break any of the other laws?

[1213]

...For clarity, was the claim of Jesus walking on water the result of him (breaking 'law' <or> not)? Same question goes for raising the rotting dead?

No, I don't think it broke any real law.

[RBD]

God is claimed to break "natural law" all the time, by walking on water, turning water into wine, raising the rotting dead, turning humans into salt, etc...

Claiming that God claims to break natural law, is a false claim of people who don't read the Bible to make such a claim.

For Debate: Does God break all "law", or just some "law"? And if only some, why only some, and not all? Further, what is the point of breaking some "law", and not others? Or maybe, God breaks all "laws", which is why the Bible is illogical, immoral, and defies later human discovery?

Or maybe, some people say anything they want about a Book, and then accuse the Book of being illogical, immoral, etc... based upon what they say about it.

Before you answer, a running theme is expressed among many theists... When a skeptic asks a theist, 'can God do anything?",

The question is, can God do all things.

Mat 19:26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

When someone is healed without natural law, skeptics are irrelevant.

[RBD]

God is claimed to break "natural law" all the time, by walking on water, turning water into wine, raising the rotting dead, turning humans into salt, etc...

For Debate: Does God break all "law", or just some "law"? And if only some, why only some, and not all? Further, what is the point of breaking some "law", and not others? Or maybe, God breaks all "laws", which is why the Bible is illogical, immoral, and defies later human discovery?

Before you answer, a running theme is expressed among many theists... When a skeptic asks a theist, 'can God do anything?", the theist might respond with, "God can only do what is logically possible and/or what is in his moral nature". In essence, God strictly abides by some "law", but not others? By "law", I'm referencing natural law, the laws of logic, moral law, mathematics, and any others I may have missed. I trust you get the gist...?

So then, you're a god by breaking the law.

Gen 3:4And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: {3:5} For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

The devil is the first one recorded accusing God of being a law breaker. As well as promising anyone they will be as gods too, by breaking the law.

[RBD]

God is claimed to break "natural law" all the time, by walking on water, turning water into wine, raising the rotting dead, turning humans into salt, etc...

For Debate: Does God break all "law", or just some "law"? And if only some, why only some, and not all? Further, what is the point of breaking some "law", and not others? Or maybe, God breaks all "laws", which is why the Bible is illogical, immoral, and defies later human discovery?

Before you answer, a running theme is expressed among many theists... When a skeptic asks a theist, 'can God do anything?", the theist might respond with, "God can only do what is logically possible and/or what is in his moral nature". In essence, God strictly abides by some "law", but not others? By "law", I'm referencing natural law, the laws of logic, moral law, mathematics, and any others I may have missed. I trust you get the gist...?

So, it's law breaking to do miracles.

Looks like Jewish legalism infects the atheists, only worse. The Jews only accused the Lord of breaking the law on the Sabbath. These atheist ardent protectors and defenders of law, accuse Him of law breaking by healing on any day of the week...

Talk about killing the Spirit by the long-knives of the letter. But of course, the Lord continues to heal without natural law, and the gainsayer legal complaints remain irrelevant to the healed.

So, some legal experts without any spiritual feeling, would never want to do, nor have anything done, that is not confined to natural law. When they're thrown in the lions den, they demand the lions break their bones, or else be accused of lion-like law breaking...

[bjs1]

God is claimed to break "natural law" all the time, by walking on water, turning water into wine, raising the rotting dead, turning humans into salt, etc...

For Debate: Does God break all "law", or just some "law"? And if only some, why only some, and not all? Further, what is the point of breaking some "law", and not others? Or maybe, God breaks all "laws", which is why the Bible is illogical, immoral, and defies later human discovery?

Before you answer, a running theme is expressed among many theists... When a skeptic asks a theist, 'can God do anything?", the theist might respond with, "God can only do what is logically possible and/or what is in his moral nature". In essence, God strictly abides by some "law", but not others? By "law", I'm referencing natural law, the laws of logic, moral law, mathematics, and any others I may have missed. I trust you get the gist...?

This is the fallacy of equivocation, which is a logical error where a word or phrase with multiple meanings is used in an argument, shifting its meaning in different parts of the argument to create a misleading or unsound conclusion.

To make an analogy, if a person who drives faster than the posted speed limit (breaking a traffic law), this does not mean that the person can or will defy gravity (breaking a law of physics).

Orthodox Christianity holds that God, as the creator of the natural world, is not bound by natural laws. However, laws of nature are inherently different from laws of morality or laws of logic.

Grouping all kinds of "laws" into a single category is equivocation.

[POI]

[Replying to RBD in post #23]

Do you want me to address post(s) 23, 24, 25, or two of the three, or all of them?

[POI]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #26]

If you don't want to address the OP, because it challenges your faith, please just leave it alone. Instead of trying to apply a 'teachable' moment, based on some erroneous and flimsy "technicality", diversion will do you no favors.

Let's start anew... Why does God have no problem violating some 'laws', but (will not or cannot) violate others?

[bjs1]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #26]

If you don't want to address the OP, because it challenges your faith, please just leave it alone. Instead of trying to apply a 'teachable' moment, based on some erroneous and flimsy "technicality", diversion will do you no favors.

I did address the OP. It does not challenge my faith. Calling out equivocation is not erroneous, flimsy, or a “technicality.” It is one of the basics of reasoned thinking.

Let's start anew... Why does God have no problem violating some 'laws', but (will not or cannot) violate others?

We categorize “laws” because they fall into intrinsically different classifications. Laws of nature, laws of etiquette, laws of logic, and federal laws are different categories of law. We know from our own experience that a human being might break one category of law, but still be unable or unwilling to break a different category of law. Grouping all laws together without recognizing their distinctions is equivocation.

[POI]

...For clarity, was the claim of Jesus walking on water the result of him (breaking 'law' <or> not)? Same question goes for raising the rotting dead?

No, I don't think it broke any real law.

Wow. Okay. So, you believe walking on top of room temperature water and rising from the rotting dead can be achieved without violating 'natural law'? If so, you have more faith in science than scientists themselves.