Well, I'll agree that Walt Whitman, not known for his piety, may have been
confusing providence with miracles -- or what is more likely -- trying to
eliminate both by trivializing miracles. I posted his poem as an example
of one possible extreme in the definition of miracles: define just about
everything as a miracle. While I don't want to trivialize the miraculous,
I believe there is validity in ascribing a number of the characteristics of
the world we live in to miracles: the fine-tuning of various physical
constants that make life in the universe, and indeed the universe itself
possible, the various chemical processes that make life possible, the
orderliness of nature, ...
However, I frequently wonder if God Himself distinguishes between miracles
and providence. From His point of view, I would presume everything He does
is simply one of a set of actions He freely selects from. And from the
difficulty scientists have in seeing His hand in the workings of nature, I
would suspect that consistency, elegance and esthetics are high on His list
of criteria for selecting His actions.
>
[snip]
>SC
>>I posed a question earlier that you skipped. In the natural world, how do
>>we know when materialism will be insufficient to explain a phenomenon? Or
>>put differently, how do we distinguish miracles from natural events. Let's
>>take the parting of the Red Sea. Was this a miracle or an event explainable
>>by natural causes?
>
JB:
>A miracle is when the materialistic cause is insufficient to explain the
>effect.
If a materialistic cause for some phenomenon was not known in 1899 and is
known in 1995, was the phenomenon a miracle in 1899 and a nonmiracle in
1995? From a human point of view it's difficult if not impossible to
categorically rule out a materialistic cause for most observed phenomena.
It seems to me that the miracles in the Bible are instances when God
stepped in and brought about a specific result for a specific purpose at a
specific time. To me the availability or nonavailability of a naturalistic
cause is irrelevant. What's relevant is that God brought about a specific
event at a specific time in such a way that it served His purpose. As you
mention in your post, the parting of the Red Sea could be such a miracle.
Suppose the folks who claim to have worked out a plausible confluence of
winds and tides that could have brought about the parting of the Red Sea
are correct. The miracle was that this confluence occurred at exactly the
time the Israelites needed it to cross the Red Sea, and it ended at exactly
the right time to prevent pursuit by the Egyptians. Or there is the
well-known miracle at Dallas Theological Seminary. In the 20's I believe,
the school was facing bankruptcy. The board of directors were praying and
Dr. Chafer prayed along these lines: "Lord, you own the cattle on a
thousand hills. Please sell some of them to meet our need." While the
directors were still praying, a cattleman enetered the outer office saying
God had told him to donate the proceeds of a sale to the school. The
amount was exactly what was needed. When the secretary took the check to
the board, one of the members recognized the cattleman's name on the check
and said to Dr. Chafer, "Louis, the Lord sold the cattle you asked Him to
sell." A naturalist would I suppose, claim it was coincidence. There was
certainly nothing miraculous about the individual events. People sell
cattle all the time. People donate money to schools all the time. But the
time, the amount and even the source seem to me to have been carefully
coordinated to say to the directors, "The Lord has answered your prayer."
_That_ is a miracle.
>Often it is difficult to know all the materialistic causes, so we can't say
>whether a certain person's recovery in our church was a miracle.
My solution to that "problem" is simply to give the glory to God. We have
had numerous healings in our church, and I for one am inclined to credit
them all to answered prayer.
>But when
>the Bible calls something a miracle (in so many words), then we should
>accept it.
Of course. And the availability of natural causes to "explain" it doesn't
change its status. Of course there are miracles in the Bible that will
never yield to natural explanation, includings the raising of Lazarus, the
incarnation, the resurrection. And there are many more that I doubt will
yield to natural explanation, such as turning water into wine at Cana. But
the miraculous aspect rests in God's ability to command nature to
accomplish His purposes when needed, rather than in men's inability to
explain the physical processes that happened to be seen as the miracles
proceeded.
>
[examples and commentary I pretty much agree with snipped]
>Let me repeat my request for a third time. I'm still awaiting that list of
>miracles TEs believe are a part of origins.
>
As I said before, I don't like the moniker "TE". I am a Christian who does
not reject evolution. As an engineer who has little knowledge of biology
it would be totally out of place for me to be an advocate of evolution.
However, I have a good number of friends whose Christianity is beyond
question IMO, who have studied the evidence for evolution, and in some
cases conduct research in related areas, who have no problem with evolution
being one of the tools in God's repertoire of methods for oversight of
nature. I have listened to what they say, read some of the references they
have suggested I read, and it makes sense to this nonexpert. Primarily the
reasons I stay in this debate are 1) The Lord told us to "Go therefore and
make disciples of all nations..." Surely He did not mean us to exclude
scientists. Yet the rhetoric of young-earth creationists has convinced
many scientists that Christianity is about the age of the earth. I work in
a research lab and I am convinced I am called to witness to scientists and
intellectuals. When I bring them to church, though, I do not want them to
hear rhetoric that will reinforce their prior, erroneous impressions; 2)I
have seen some unconscionable treatment of Christians who accept evolution
at the hands of Christians who oppose it. I would like to help cool the
rhetoric if possible.
Wow! And I haven't even answered your question. Okay. Speaking as a
Christian who is not necessarily a TE, I will say what I said before: How
about the entire list of events in Genesis 1 and 2? As we said before, the
availability of naturalistic explanations (and they are not available for
all the events) does not make them nonmiraculous.
Bill Hamilton | Vehicle Systems Research
GM R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX)
hamilton@gmr.com (office) | whamilto@mich.com (home)