Just how to Work Miracles

Note the distinction. The technology involved, however advanced, doesn't quality the action as a miracle. In the end, I've stipulated that the technology lies within natural law, and possibly even some far future human capability. The action rises to a miraculous level on the timing of the action. This God-like entity, not with a magical trick, but with a supernatural capacity, has used a technology ahead of when mankind's ability to do so and before mankind's knowledge of how it works.Thus, in my own view, no presumption must exist that, say Christ, violated the laws of nature. This type of thought does take us outside convention. Many would respond no need exists to "dumb down" miracles - scripture, revelation and theology support a belief that God can,  a course in miracles      did and does violate the laws of nature.That is fine. However, my judgment remains - reported miracles could represent application by a God-like entity of advanced technology, and further, that this application, being beyond, well beyond, the human capabilities during the time, fits the thought of a miracle. This wider - in my mind still valid - conception of miracles significantly, even severely, impedes my maintaining, with certainty, the non-existence of miracles.In current times, we seem not to have large-scale or undisputed miracles. No sea has opened, no crowd of thousands has been fed, no army has crumbled at the name of God. Admittedly, the Catholic Church does maintain a set of unexplainable healings, which they have classified (after fairly exhaustive consideration) as miracles. But to numerous non-believers, the lack of a discernable explanation more properly indicates the limitation of scientific knowledge and investigatory tools, not the power of a God.So let's posit that no miracles have, or have been, occurring in modern times.

I would argue that such a fact bears no significance to the existence of miracles. None.The Isaac Asimov Foundation series offers an analogy. In that series, the great mathematician Hari Seldon, predicated on his fictional theory of psychohistory, sets in motion a scheme to shorten an impeding collapse of the Galactic Empire into chaos. His strategy extends for centuries. Across those centuries, the Galactic population will sequence through a series of phases, with each dominated by a controlling paradigm, for instance trading, or wizardry, or science.The Foundation Series extends through ten books, and those ten books contain an underlying theme of the "salvation" of humanity, engineered and lead by a sensible, moral leader (i.e. Hari Seldon), plus a band of dedicated followers/disciplines.Religions offer a salvation theme. The underlying current of the Foundation Series parallels, reasonably directly, the proffered salvation themes of religion. And if the Seldon plan (and its supporting and guiding Foundations) steps through differing eras, so could religious salvation.If mankind currently operates under a spiritual salvation plan, such a plan could contain phases, analogous to the Seldon plan. And those phases could contain variations in the look and capability for miracles. Not every phase would involve miracles, and no requirement would exist a current phase of a spiritual salvation plan involve miracles.

Am I arguing this kind of salvation plan exists? No. I'm arguing that the lack of miracles provides no logical basis for maintaining this type of plan doesn't exist, or that miracles don't exist.Did Christ "really" die? Could he haven't been in a suspended state? Did he "really" rise, or did he just appear being an apparition, or as an illusion he generated in the minds of his followers?I'd maintain Christ did not require to "really" die, nor did he need certainly to "really" rise in a human physical form, for his Resurrection to represent the cornerstone miracle and act of Christianity.As before, a preface is needed. Many believe, without reservation, Christ completely died on the cross, undergoing a complete, utter, total ceasing of any body functioning. They further believe he rose from the dead, bodily, in the flesh, in complete physical form. Theology, tradition, scripture, revelation, and the non-public conviction of numerous, support such a belief.But others do not think that either Christ died, or that he physically and bodily rose from the dead.Just as I maintain a miracle does not require to violate the laws of nature to truly and completely be a miracle of a God-like entity, I'd maintain that Christ did not require to completely die and bodily rise for the Death and Resurrection to be truly miraculous.Let's assume Christ used some advanced medical techniques, or drugs, or special biochemical phenomena, to keep up a state near death. Would this kind of act be miraculous?

Consider Christ's crucifixion. That act inflicted upon Christ extensive, debilitating, blood-letting wounds beyond, well beyond, the capability of any current or near-future medical techniques to keep life. And certainly beyond the capability of any medical techniques of the time.Thus, if Christ managed, in a few manner, not to "really" die, but alternatively maintain a near-death status, that would represent an astounding, dare say miraculous, achievement. The crucifixion punctured Christ, draining blood and bodily fluids, after which he received no medical attention, food, liquids and other life sustaining treatment.In an identical manner, in the Resurrection, Christ did not want to bodily rise. In just about any manner, Christ's being present to the apostles represents an astounding, miraculous act.