Re: Signs of Scientism

*To me, this whole issue is a moot point: if we were to find any wine in
2006, we would doubt its authenticity; if we had been around in ~30 AD we
would not have had the equipment to test the wine other than to taste it.*

Right, it was just a hypothetical to illustrate a point, not something
realistic. But man, wouldn't you love to get your hands on some of that ~30
A.D. Cana vintage? Would you cellar it, decant it, or sell it on Ebay?

On 1/19/06, Tjalle T Vandergraaf <ttveiv@mts.net> wrote:
>
> Yes, I know that there were no bottles at that time and that amphorae
> were not intended for long-term storage (but they kept the contents cool).
> My response, somewhat tongue in cheek) was to David who wrote, "Suppose
> for example we ome to the house where the wedding at Cana was held and find
> some of the wine that Jesus made from water. I presume it would look, smell
> and taste like any other wine -- no discernable difference from ordinary
> wine." To me, this whole issue is a moot point: if we were to find any
> wine in 2006, we would doubt its authenticity; if we had been around in ~30
> AD we would not have had the equipment to test the wine other than to taste
> it. The Biblical record shows that the wine passed the taste test. Good
> enough for me! Whether one believes that the molecular structure of the
> various components in that wine passed muster (I believe they did) or
> whether one believes that this was a case of wishful thinking and/or mass
> delusion (I don't think so), the main point is that the result showed the
> power of Jesus and that he is the Christ.
>
>
>
> The Resurrection is a totally different miracle; not that it was more
> difficult for God to raise Jesus than to turn water into wine, but because
> it is intrinsic to our salvation [1 Cor. 15]. The evidence of the
> Resurrection was good enough for the disciples.
>
>
>
> Chuck Vandergraaf
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* D. F. Siemens, Jr. [mailto:dfsiemensjr@juno.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 19, 2006 3:49 PM
> *To:* ttveiv@mts.net
> *Cc:* williamehamiltonjr@yahoo.com; dopderbeck@gmail.com; gmurphy@raex.com;
> pimvanmeurs@yahoo.com; asa@calvin.edu
> *Subject:* Re: Signs of Scientism
>
>
>
> Seems to me this confuses what might be discovered now and what might have
> been available to someone at the time. But there were no bottled wines two
> millennia ago. Scripture talks of wineskins, and archeologists have
> discovered amphorae used to ship wine. Both are too porous to preserve
> liquid for a great length of time. Consequently all we can possibly have is
> the record in John 2. So if anyone offers you a bottle of wine from that
> made at Cana, have him arrested for fraud.
>
>
>
> What about at the time? One could interview the MC, who would probably
> only know that they were running short of wine and then had plenty of better
> quality. But he'd likely be very confused that the wine was in the water
> containers rather than in skins, with no skins around to account for the
> ~300 liters of wine--at least six skins' worth. One could interview the
> servants who filled the containers with water and took out wine. One could
> check around town to find out how many wineskins members of the family had
> purchased, each perhaps holding 55 liters (that's litres for our British
> friends like Michael), and how many had been consumed at various times
> during the festivities.
>
>
>
> As for the resurrection, when Paul wrote his noted chapter, there were
> those who had been in Jerusalem at the time and could have refuted him.
> There was the effect on the followers of Jesus, scared and hiding to
> fearlessly proclaiming--even willing to die rather than recanting. They sure
> persuaded a lot of people. This is not proof, but clearly evidence.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:52:09 -0600 "Tjalle T Vandergraaf" <ttveiv@mts.net>
> writes:
>
> As to the wine at Cana, if wine were found this year, believers would
> claim that this was evidence of the power of Christ. Non-believers and
> sceptics would argue that somebody had fiddled with the evidence. (what
> protocols were used to preserve the sample and what is the effect of aging
> on wine?) If the wine had been sealed in bottles with an authorized
> signature, there would be a line up of tasters and, if it still tasted
> like good wine, there would be demands for C-14 and O isotope ratio
> testing. Remember the fuss over the Shroud of Turin.
>
>
Received on Thu Jan 19 17:58:12 2006