Let me begin with a confession: I honestly don’t know what to make of the “miracle of the sun” that occurred in Fatima, Portugal, on October 13, 1917, and that was witnessed by a crowd of 70,000 people (although a few people in the crowd saw nothing) and also by people who were more than 10 kilometers away from Fatima at the time, as well as by sailors on a British ship off the coast of Portugal. On the other hand, no astronomical observatory recorded anything unusual at the time.
Rather than endorsing a particular point of view, I have decided to lay the facts before my readers, and let them draw their own conclusions.
Here are some good links, to get you started.
Neutral accounts of the visions and the “solar miracle” at Fatima:
Our Lady of Fatima (Wikipedia article: describes the visions leading up to the solar miracle). Generally balanced.
Miracle of the Sun (Wikipedia article). Discusses critical explanations of the miracle, and points out that people both in Fatima and the nearby town of Alburitel were expecting some kind of solar phenomenon to occur on October 13, 1917: some had even brought along special viewing glasses. Also, the solar miracle on October 13 was preceded by some bizarre celestial phenomena witnessed by bystanders at the preceding vision on September 13, including “a dimming of the sun to the point where the stars could be seen, and a rain resembling iridescent petals or snowflakes that disappeared before touching the ground.” In short: the “solar miracle” of October 13, 1917 didn’t come entirely as a bolt from the blue.
The Fatima Prophecies by Stephen Wagner, Paranormal Phenomena Expert. Updated April 10, 2016.
Catholic, pro-miracle accounts:
Meet the Witnesses of the Miracle of the Sun by John Haffert. Spring Grove, Pennsylvania: The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property, 1961. John M. Haffert is a co-founder of the Blue Army of Fatima. He interviewed dozens of witnesses of the solar miracle at Fatima, and carefully records their testimonies in his book.
The True Story of Fatima by Fr. John de Marchi. St. Paul, Minnesota: Catechetical Guild Educational Society, 1956. Fr. de Marchi is an acknowledged expert on Fatima, whose account is based on the testimony of the seers, members of their families, and other acquaintances.
The Sixth Apparition of Our Lady. A short article containing eyewitness recollections, from the EWTN Website Celebrating 100 years of Fatima. (Very well-produced and easy to navigate.)
The Apparitions at Fatima. A short account of the visions and the solar miracle.
Catholic attempts to rebut skeptical debunkings of the solar miracle at Fatima:
Debunking the Sun Miracle Skeptics by Mark Mallett, a Canadian Catholic evangelist and former TV reporter. The author’s tone is irenic, and he evaluates the evidence fairly. His blog is well worth having a look at.
Ten Greatest (And Hilarious) Scientific Explanations for Miracle at Fatima by Matthew Archbold. National Catholic Register. Blog article. March 27, 2011. Rather polemical and sarcastic in tone.
Why the solar miracle couldn’t have been a hallucination:
Richard Dawkins And The Miracle Of Sun by Donal Anthony Foley. The Wanderer, Saturday, November 5, 2016. Makes the telling point that it was seen by sailors on a passing ship, who knew nothing about the visions.
A Catholic account by a scientist-priest who thinks that the “miracle” was a natural meteorological phenomenon, but that the coincidence between the timing of this natural event and the vision can only have a supernatural explanation:
Miracle of the Sun and an Air Lens (Theory of Father Jaki) by Dr. Taylor Marshall. Blog article. “Fr Jaki suggests that an ‘air lens’ of ice crystals formed above the Cova in Portugual. This lens would explain how the sun ‘danced’ at Fatima, but not over the whole earth. Thus, it was a local phenomenon that was seen at the Cova, and by others who were not present with the three children of Fatima within a 40 mile radius.” An air lens would also explain how the muddy and wet ground at the site of the apparitions suddenly dried up, after the miracle.
God and the Sun at Fatima by Fr. Stanley Jaki. Real View Books, 1999. Reviewed by Martin Kottmeyer. See also the attached footnote by Joaquim Fernandes, Center for Transdisciplinary Study on Consciousness, University Fernando Pessoa, Porto, Portugal, who argues that on the contrary, it was a UFO.
A Catholic, “anti-miracle” account by a scientist who thinks it was an optical illusion:
Apparitions and Miracles of the Sun by Professor Auguste Meessen, Institute of Physics, Catholic Univeristy of Louvain, Belgium. Paper given at the International Forum in Porto, “Science, Religion and Conscience,” October 23-25, 2003. Excerpt:
“So-called “miracles of the sun” were observed, for instance, in Tilly-sur-Seuilles (France, 1901), Fatima (Portugal, 1917), Onkerzeele (Belgium, 1933), Bonate (Italy, 1944), Espis (France, 1946), Acquaviva Platani (Italy, 1950), Heroldsbach (Germany, 1949), Fehrbach (Germany, 1950), Kerezinen (France, 1953), San Damiano (Italy, 1965), Tre Fontane (Italy, 1982) and Kibeho (Rwanda, 1983). They have been described by many witnesses and from their reports we can extract the following characteristic features, appearing successively.
“· A grey disc seems to be placed between the sun and the observer, but a brilliant rim of the solar disc is still apparent…
· Beautiful colours appear after a few minutes on the whole surface of the solar disc, at its rim and in the surrounding sky. These colours are different, however, and they change in the course of time…
· The sun begins to ‘dance’. First, the solar disk rotates about its centre at a uniform and rather high velocity (about 1 turn/s). Then the rotation stops and starts again, but now it is opposite to the initial one. Suddenly, the solar disk seems to detach itself from the sky. It comes rapidly closer, with increasing size and brilliancy. This causes great panic, since people think that the end of the world has come, but the sun retreats. It moves backwards until it has again its initial appearance…
· Finally, after 10 or 15 minutes, the sun is ‘normal’ again: its luminosity is too strong to continue gazing at it. But after about another quarter of an hour, the prodigy can be repeated in the same way…
“…It is shown that the hypothesis of an extraterrestrial intervention is not sufficient to explain all observed facts, while this is possible in terms of natural, but very peculiar physiological processes. The proof results from personal experiments and reasoning, based on relevant scientific literature.
“…Dr. J.B. Walz, a university professor of theology, collected over 70 eye-witness reports of the ‘miracle of the sun’ that occurred in Heroldsbach [an ecclesiastically condemned apparition – VJT] on December 8, 1949. These documents disclose some individual differences in perception, including the fact that one person saw the sun approaching and receding three times, while most witnesses saw this only two times! The ‘coloured spheres’ that were usually perceived after the breathtaking ‘dance of the sun’ are simply after-images, but they were not recognized as such, since the context of these observations suggested a prodigious interpretation.
“…The general conclusion is that apparitions and miracles of the sun cannot be taken at face value. There are natural mechanisms that can explain them, but they are so unusual that we were not aware of them. Miracles of the sun result from neurophysiological processes in our eyes and visual cortex, while apparitions involve more complex processes in our mind’s brain. The seers are honest, but unconsciously, they put themselves in an altered state of consciousness. This is possible, since our brain allows for ‘dissociation’ and for ‘switching’ from one type of behaviour to another.”
Meessen’s own explanation of the miracle as an optical illusion is based on experiments which he performed on himself, while looking at the sun under carefully controlled conditions (so as not to damage his eyes). However, I should point out that Meessen’s exposure to the sun’s optical effects was fairly short in duration (30 seconds), whereas the solar miracle at Fatima lasted far longer (over 10 minutes) and didn’t damage any of the spectators’ eyes.
Catholic blogger Mark Mallett also points out: “Professor Meesen’s logic further falls apart by stating that the dancing effects of the sun were merely the result of retinal after-images. If that were the case, then the miracle of the sun witnessed at Fatima should be easily duplicated in your own backyard.”
However, Meessen does a good job of debunking the “UFO hypothesis”: he points out that had it been a UFO covering the sun, it could not have been seen 40 kilometers away. Also, at least some witnesses would have reported seeing a “partial eclipse,” but none ever did.
A paranormal explanation of the solar miracle at Fatima:
The First Alien Contact And UFO Sighting Of The 20th Century by Tob Williams. Blog article. April 10, 2011. Updated June 18, 2016.
The Fatima UFO hypothesis by Lon Strickler. February 11, 2012.
https://www.paranormalnews.com/article.aspx?id=1562
“Live Science” debunking of the solar miracle:
The Lady of Fátima & the Miracle of the Sun by Benjamin Radford. May 2, 2013. Ascribes the miracle to “an optical illusion caused by thousands of people looking up at the sky, hoping, expecting, and even praying for some sign from God,” which, “if you do it long enough, can give the illusion of the sun moving as the eye muscles tire.” Also suggests that mass hysteria and pareidolia can explain some features of the visions.
Skeptic Benjamin Radford on the Fátima Miracle by Dr. Stacy Trasancos. A response to Radford’s debunking. Points out that plenty of dispassionate observers at Fatima also reported seeing the sun move. Promotes Fr. Stanley L. Jaki’s carefully researched book on Fatima. Acknowledges that there may be a scientific explanation for what happened with the sun that day, but argues that this doesn’t explain the timing of the event, and why it coincided with the visions.
Virulently anti-Fatima accounts:
Solar Miracle of Fatima and
Fraud at Fatima. The author places too much reliance on discredited sources, such as Celestial Secrets: The Hidden History of the Fatima Incident by Portuguese UFOlogist Joachim Fernandes (critically reviewed here by Edmund Grant). The author also tries to argue, unconvincingly, that only half the people at Fatima actually witnessed the miracle, whereas in fact there were only a few people who saw nothing. See Jaki, Stanley L. (1999). God and the Sun at Fátima, Real View Books, pp. 170–171, 232, 272. The author is right in pointing out, however, that Lucia’s own published account of her visions at Fatima is highly retrospective (being written over 20 years after the event) and contains a lot of added material. Also, the seers didn’t all see the same thing: Lucia, for instance, saw Our Lady’s lips move while she was speaking, while Francisco (who saw Our Lady but never heard her speak), didn’t see Our Lady’s lips moving – a point acknowledged by Fr. de Marchi (see above). Finally, some of the prophecies associated with Fatima turned out to be false.
My own take:
Given the evidence that the solar miracle was witnessed by passing sailors and also seen at several different locations within a 40-kilometer radius of Fatima, I cannot simply dismiss it as a hallucination. Professor Meessen’s arguments (discussed above) appear to rule out the possibility that it was a UFO. The theory that it was an optical illusion founders on the fact that nobody reported any damage to their eyes, subsequent to the miracle. The hypothesis that it was a natural, local meteorological phenomenon sounds promising, but the fortuitous timing of the “miracle” (which coincided with the seers’ visions) would still point to supernatural intervention of some sort. Finally, if it was really a miracle, then one has to ask: what, exactly, was the miracle? After all, no law of Nature was broken: no-one seriously suggests that the Sun actually hurtled towards the Earth, as witnesses reported. The notion of God messing with people’s senses sounds pretty strange, too: why would He do that? On the other hand, the testimony of 70,000 witnesses is very impressive, and the event clearly meant something … but what? Beats me.
Over to you.
FWIW, I think the fact that someone would spend so much time reading and thinking about this matter is more interesting than the “miracle.” It boggles my mind.
That’s not intended as an insult: I’m just giving my honest take.
This sort of points to the difficulty of deciding if an unknown phenomenon is a miracle, “design,” or whatever. Even if we think this is no hallucination, illusion, or issue of looking at the sun, what is it anyway?
There was a Catholic chemistry professor in our area, very pro-science and opposed to ID/creationism, who seemed to want to experience something supernatural. He went to Fatima (as I recall, unless there might be another place where similar “miracles” occurred–it was Europe for sure) and saw some of the same phenomena, and apparently felt like he’d seen the hand of God, or whatever. My tendency is to think that if he could go off to Fatima and see what people saw in the miraculous time, it’s probably a matter of human physiology and/or psychology. I don’t begrudge him his miracle (and he wasn’t insistent that others accept it), to be sure, but it seems the less impressive to me that he can go off and see something that others saw long ago at a time designated for the miracle.
At best it’s an unknown, which doesn’t really tell us anything about God or anyone else who might be behind it (I’m sure that Ancient Aliens believes, but credits aliens), and at worst it’s likely due to physiologic and psychologic effects. I’m inclined toward the latter.
Glen Davidson
That pretty much settles it for me. Admittedly, it does not rule out a local meteorological disturbance, though I don’t see a persuasive case for that, either.
I’m no sure that this is much different from “fake news” that we hear about today, and that is believed by millions of people.
Right. The fact that there are fifty books on immediately makes me suspicious. If there were no God angle, there’d be at most two books, and none of the 37 people who’d read either of them would be anxious to report on it here.
Also, the “70,000” would be 118.
Echoing what Glen said, assume for the case of argument the events were as witnessed. What connects that to the Catholic version of God? Or indeed any version of God?
And where did the 70,000 figure come from? Do we have their names and individual testimony?
I stopped taking these posts seriously with the levitating priest.
Regarding the human propensity to believe miracles, there’s Conan Doyle — who was not stupid, and who wrote about a skeptical detective — who broke his friendship with Houdini because Houdini insisted his illusions were just stagecraft.
Some people really want to believe in magic.
petrushka,
And Conan Doyle was fooled by a couple of girls with a box camera and some skill with graphics into believing they had fairies at the bottom of their garden! 😉
ETA Cottingley Fairies
I like that movie.
walto, Didn’t mean to spoil your illusion, sorry! 🙁
Hah. I’m talking about the lovely Charles Sturridge movie:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairyTale:_A_True_Story
“The hypothesis that it was a natural, local meteorological phenomenon sounds promising, but the fortuitous timing of the “miracle” (which coincided with the seers’ visions) would still point to supernatural intervention of some sort.”
No, it wouldn’t. It is entirely possible and plausible that it was sheer coincidence. You don’t need anything other than mere chance to explain this. How many times do divine interventions fail to happen? So when finally something happens, it’s supernatural intervention? Why not just happenstance? Luck?
As others have said above, supposing this is a real phenomenon, what could connect it to the Christian god? And wouldn’t such a miracle be theologically suspect? God is often supposed not to give us physical evidence of his existence, since that would obviate faith, and faith is said to be a virtue. Contrariwise, if a deity really did want to provide a clear miracle, this would hardly be it. Something permanent and undeniable would seem to be more suited to the purpose, like a rearrangement of stars to spell out “YHWH was here”. The fact that the nature of this thing is so unclear would argue against it being a miracle, unless the miracle was intended only to impress a few people in Portugal and annoy everyone else.
It probably never occurred to you that astronomical observatories aren’t actual observers, but rather places for observers to make observations.
And maybe a thirty-thousand piece orchestra to accompany it? With, like, floating harps?
Keep in mind, I’m just spitballing here…..
the testimony of 70,000 witnesses is very impressive … This is Kairos Focus logic: if I report that N people witnessed something, my report is N times as credible. Something about that doesn’t smell right.
It’s such a shame that spectacular mass miracles have stopped occurring since almost everybody has a phone with a video camera.
It’s amazing to me that in the age of the professional stage magician and cellphone camera people still swallow this guff.
There are no good reason to believe in ghosts, alien flying saucers, gods, demons, people with “telekinetic powers”, regrowing amputations, wizards/witches, bigfoot, and so on.
None of it ever seems to happen to skeptics in a way where they can record it. From my posotion it looks like that, in all likelihood, it’s all ad-hoc gullible interpretations, rationalizations and subconscious confabulations. Accounts get re-told, exaggerated, altered, half-forgotten, filled in later, translated and so on and so forth.
We don’t have to posit any kind of fraud for this (though we already know bona fide cases of religions started on fraud, e.g. Scientology, Mormonism). People make this shit up in their heads without even knowing it all the time. In fact, it seems to be one of the things the brain is best at: Filling in blanks with whatever’s laying around in storage. The brain will readily confabulate stories to connect separate memories into a coherent history.
In light of all of this, how can one still believe on the mere say-so of old books and written accounts? It says 70.000 people saw it. Did someone interview those 70.000 people, or did someone merely estimate that there were 70.000 people present and a few of them were interviewed? Why doesn’t this crap happen today?
The fact that seemingly miraculous/supernatural/physically impossible things can be routinely staged by professional magicians and illusionists, combined with our knowledge of the human psyche and cognitive functions, plus the known, documented cases of religions started on fraud, means a properly informed person who knows about these things simply shouldn’t be convinced by the mere say-so of other people. Particularly when these people are long dead.
” I honestly don’t know what to make of the “miracle of the sun” that occurred in Fatima, Portugal, on October 13, 1917″
Aren’t you the guy who believes if one person writes in a book that 500 people saw something, that’s like the same as 500 eye-witness testimonies?
Why are you dumb in one case but skeptical in another?
It’s not like you’re Salvador, you probably have some kinda ethics.
I have to agree with you. A person documenting that there were 70000 witnesses to something carries very little weight with me. However, a person who could produce 70000 first person documented instances of them witnessing the same thing, I might start to listen.
If we blindly accepted eye witness testimony, we would have to accept the fact that aliens are obsessed with probing our anuses.
KairosFocus is a sad case. A black island guy who wishes he was a white American conservative fighting the muslims.
Are there any Intelligent Design people who aren’t deranged?
KF actually wants to be Barry Arrington. How pathetic is that.
As long as he doesn’t want to be Bornagain77. That would be a step down, even for Mullings.
Just to make our newer members aware, the site was set up to encourage dialogue across gulfs of misunderstanding. One of the rules intended to support this idea is:
Though we do now have a thread, Noyau, available for rule-free* discussion.
*except porn, malware, etc.
god seemed much more active in our world in the past then it does today. Any thoughts on why, theists?
Does god not like cameraphones? Is it shy?
God is always active.
It seems like he is more active the closer we get to important events in redemptive history. When you are close to a critical event in history the unlikely “coincidences” are more noticeable because everything has to be just so in order for the event to happen.
peace
This is another instance of the “silly skeptic” engaging in ad-hoc rationalizations to try to explain away what is actually valid evidence against God-caused miracles. So you’ve now come up with this story after the fact to avoid something uncomfortable.
Hi everyone. Just a few quick responses.
Alan Fox asks:
According to the Wikipedia article on the Miracle of the Sun, “Estimates of [the] number present range from 30,000 and 40,000 by Avelino de Almeida, writing for the Portuguese newspaper O Século,[5] to 100,000, estimated by Dr. Joseph Garrett, professor of natural sciences at the University of Coimbra,[6] both of whom were present that day.[7]”
Refs: De Marchi, John (1952a). The True Story of Fatima. St. Paul Minnesota: Catechetical Guild Entertainment Society.
[5] (De Marchi 1952a)
[6] (De Marchi 1952a:177)
[7] (De Marchi 1952a:185–187)
As for names and addresses, let me refer you to Meet the Witnesses of the Miracle of the Sun by John Haffert. Spring Grove, Pennsylvania: The American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property, 1961. Haffert personally interviewed about 200 people for his book.
You may object that 200 falls far short of 70,000. However, contemporary accounts attest that the solar miracle was seen by almost everyone. Here’s an excerpt from secular agnostic Avelino de Almeida’s eyewitness account, published in O Século:
I might add that only a few people in the crowd are known to have seen nothing. (See Fr. Jaki’s book.)
Rumraket asks:
See above. As for why this kind of thing isn’t still happening today, many Catholics believe it still is. See here. According to this Website, something pretty big is due to happen in 2017, the 100th anniversary of Fatima. March 18, 2017 is being touted as a significant date for something HUGE. See here and here.
Please note that I’m not endorsing these claims: actually, I think Medjugorje is very probably bogus. Anyway, we’ll know soon enough.
Re the hypothesis that the “miracle” was a local atmospheric phenomenon which was providentially arranged to coincide with the visions at Fatima, Rumraket adds:
You have to admit the timing is pretty nice: the event happened shortly after noon (by local solar time), at just the time when people were waiting for a miracle. And what about the fact that a mini-solar miracle was also observed a month earlier, on September 13, 1917, as I pointed out in my article? That’s a double coincidence.
John Harshman asks:
Re the identity of the figure seen in the visions: on October 13, 1917, Lucia (the eldest of the seers) asked the woman she was seeing in her visions, “Will you tell me your name?”
She got the reply, “I am the Lady of the Rosary.” That sure sounds like a link to the Christian God, to me.
I entirely agree that a permanent sign would be much better as evidence. Believers in the apparitions at Medjugorje (which have continued since 1981) insist that there will be just such a sign. As I said, I’m highly skeptical of that particular vision.
Ahmed Kiaan asks:
Writing in a book doesn’t make the testimony true. But if the guy writing the book also tells his audience that many of these 500 people are still alive today (1 Corinthians 15:6), and he goes on to invite them to come to Jerusalem (where they could easily interview these people, if they wished – see 1 Corinthians 16:3-4), then I have to conclude that the claim of 500 witnesses is probably factual.
I do agree, however, that any argument for the historicity of the resurrection has to take account of what happened at Fatima.
OMagain asks:
Attempts to record the solar miracle on film at both Fatima and Medjugorje have failed. Draw your own conclusions.
We know that supernatural revelations are highly reliable, do we?
How has this been established?
Glen Davidson
Short version: Some people staring directly at the sun have vision issues, scientific instruments record nothing of note.
I’d like to sell you a bridge. Many people say its a good bridge.
500 people in Jerusalem say that my bridge is the best.
Glen Davidson
Here’s another skeptical analysis: https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4110 in addition to the ones supplied by vjtorley.
The “500 witnesses” claim is nowhere mentioned in the synoptic gospels (Corinthians is attributed to Paul, who never met Jesus). Which is more likely:
1. That the gospel writers would fail to mention a most convincing piece of evidence for the resurrection when it, in fact, happened; or
2. That it didn’t happen and Paul (or more likely, a later Christian partisan) made it up?
Seriously, who among the Corinthians would have had the time and money to go to Jerusalem for a natter with the surviving “witnesses”? I’m sure VJT is well aware of this objection, but he goes on trotting out the miracle claim whenever his apologetics demand it.
L. Ron. Hubbard spotted!
I read in a book that a super-magical thing happened! LOL
That’s totally not dumb as shit.
Note that the witnesses vary radically in what they claim to have seen. This does not inspire confidence. That a bunch of people primed for a miracle see a miracle is not surprising. That they see different miracles is likewise not surprising. That they then attempt to reassure each other to get their stories straight isn’t surprising either. Why are you taking this seriously?
Specifically, that’s a link to Mary, Mother of God. Are you a Catholic? I thought you were a protestant, and therefore hostile to the cult of Mary.
Let me get this straight. People in Portugal are told to expect a solar phenomenon of biblical nature. Subsequently, thousands of devout Catholics stare at the sun and, surprisingly, experience some visual experience. Some of which sound remarkably like the afterimages we all see when we stare at a bright light.
Or, it could just be the northern lights.
If you publish a fake report about a UFO on the front page of a newspaper asking for witnesses to come forward – they will. In their droves.
Their accounts will likely have a great many similarities, and the people who come forward won’t only be cranks and attention seekers.
Similarly, ask a bunch of psychologically primed and expectant Catholics to stare at the sun for a period of time and I’d be amazed if most of them didn’t report some kind of Marian inflected vision.
I think they were not told what the miracle would be .On the other hand it would seem natural to look up for the divine.
Hi Vincent, thanks for the reply. However, I would be much more interested in your thoughts on how we can connect the alleged events to a particular deity.
So, people attended the “event” expecting to see a miracle? Explains a lot! 🙂
No, he’s Catholic, as seems also to be his preference in miracle accounts.
Glen Davidson
When phones with cameras came out, there was a brief fad with some apps that could produce miracle images to order. Point and shoot spectres.
But if 70,000 phones recorded the same thing from different viewpoints, that would be impressive.
But the greater miracle is that 70,000 people believed it happened, rather than it happened. 🙂
http://arstechnica.co.uk/information-technology/2016/11/adobe-voco-photoshop-for-audio-speech-editing/
One thing at a time ;P
If you look up Credulous in the dictionary it’s a pic of VJT.
It’s not ad hoc at all the Bible makes it clear that “signs” accompany major events in redemptive history.
If things like that happened all the time there would be no way to know when the important stuff was happening.
The word Greek word here is σημεῖον it’s is used 57 times in the New Testament. It means………
quote:
1. a sign, mark, token
a. that by which a person or a thing is distinguished from others and is known
b. a sign, prodigy, portent, i.e. an unusual occurrence, transcending the common course of nature
1. of signs portending remarkable events soon to happen
2. of miracles and wonders by which God authenticates the men sent by him, or by which men prove that the cause they are pleading is God’s
end quote:
By definition signs should be rare and associated with important events in redemptive history
And that is exactly where we find them
for example
at the exodus::
You shall speak all that I command you, and your brother Aaron shall tell Pharaoh to let the people of Israel go out of his land. But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt,
(Exo 7:2-3)
and at the incarnation:::
“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know—
(Act 2:22)
This is simply Christianity 101. Nothing uncomfortable about it.
The rarity of “signs” nowadays is actually evidence supporting the case the Jesus was special and Christianity is true.
Just once here I’d like to find a critic who would address what we actually believe instead of a straw man.
peace
But Exodus wasn’t originally written in Demotic Greek, was it?