(12-09-2018, 12:17 AM)brunumb Wrote:(12-08-2018, 10:45 PM)SteveII Wrote:(12-08-2018, 09:31 PM)brunumb Wrote: Accounts of miracles in the Bible is no more evidence for miracles than accounts of spells cast by Harry Potter is evidence for magic.
Ugh. Do you actually think those two thing are analogous? Really? In case you do, it's not.
Of course they are analogous. Two popular works of fiction containing magical events. Neither work is evidence for magic. Miracle is just a term adopted by religion as a substitute for magic, probably because people don't really believe in magic.
The two accounts become analogous once we add time and venality and, in at least Harry's case, subtract technology. Harry Potter a hundred years out, with no technology associating Him with His actual author, becomes a hero/teacher tale. Add a few authoritarians who want to control people with a cosmic stick, a few mentally ill people who latch onto the saga and develop visions and interpretations, and a few yanks of the original books, and a few hundred years later you get the enormous Church of Hogwarts and a big bunch of rules. Leading to bunches of Steves condescending that anyone who attacks Potter's historicity is misguided.
god, ugh
