I would argue, however, this traditional characterization excludes phenomena which could properly qualify as miracles.Consider nearly any modern technology. That technology, be it electricity, automobiles, computers, antibiotics, cellphones, jet planes, even something as mundane as an icebox, all would seem miracle-like to individuals living at the time of Abraham, or Christ, or Buddha, or Mohammed.Looking forward, can we not envision future capabilities that could appear miracle-like today, even against our current technology? I would say certainly. Consider mind-to-mind linkage; consider direct activation of cellular repair; consider harnessing capabilities of extra-spatial dimensions, consider even circular information loops in time. We certainly should manage to envision them; they arise often in science fiction. And we can conceive that such capabilities could fall within the laws of nature, and even sooner or later the capabilities of our technology.Given that, if today a conscious, intelligent God-like entity appeared (God-like, i.e. not only an unfamiliar from another world) and exercised those capabilities, could we not reasonably label the acts miraculous? I'd posit yes. They would be miraculous, despite not violating the laws of nature, simply because they lie beyond, well beyond, current and even near-future human capability and since they epitomize and are in line with the motivations of a God-like entity. a course in miracles
Note the distinction. The technology involved, however advanced, doesn't quality the action as a miracle. After all, I have stipulated that the technology lies within natural law, and maybe 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 mysterious trick, but with a supernatural capacity, has used a technology well before mankind's ability to take action and before mankind's understanding of how it works.Thus, in my own view, no presumption must exist that, say Christ, violated the laws of nature. This distinct 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, did and does violate the laws of nature.That is fine. However, my judgment remains - reported miracles could represent application by way of 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 see 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 listing of unexplainable healings, which they've classified (after fairly exhaustive consideration) as miracles. But to many non-believers, having less a discernable explanation more properly indicates the limitation of scientific knowledge and investigatory tools, not the ability of a God.So let's posit that no miracles have, or have now 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 has an analogy. Because series, the truly amazing 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, like 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 smart, 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, this type of plan could contain phases, analogous to the Seldon plan. And those phases could contain variations in the looks and capability for miracles. Not every phase would involve miracles, and no requirement would exist that the current phase of a spiritual salvation plan involve miracles.
Am I arguing such a salvation plan exists? No. I am arguing that the possible lack of miracles provides no logical basis for maintaining such a plan doesn't exist, or that miracles don't exist.Did Christ "really" die? Could he haven't experienced a suspended state? Did he "really" rise, or did he just appear as an apparition, or being an illusion he generated in the minds of his followers?I'd maintain Christ did not want to "really" die, nor did he need certainly to "really" rise in an individual 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 several, support such a belief.But others don't believe that either Christ died, or he physically and bodily rose from the dead.Just as I maintain a miracle does not need to violate the laws of nature to genuinely and completely be a miracle of a God-like entity, I would maintain that Christ did not want 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 situation 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 that time.Thus, if Christ managed, in a few manner, not to "really" die, but alternatively maintain a near-death status, that will represent an astounding, dare say miraculous, achievement. The crucifixion punctured Christ, draining blood and bodily fluids, after which it he received no medical attention, food, liquids and other life sustaining treatment.In the same manner, in the Resurrection, Christ did not require to bodily rise. In just about any manner, Christ's being give the apostles represents an astounding, miraculous act.
No comments:
Post a Comment