In a nutshell (from the Princeton U. Press website):
Sivertsen shows how the first exodus followed a 1628 B.C.E Minoan eruption that produced all but one of the first nine plagues. The second exodus followed an eruption of a volcano off the Aegean island of Yali almost two centuries later, creating the tenth plague of darkness and a series of tsunamis that "parted the sea" and drowned the pursuing Egyptian army.
Uh huh. I bring this up because books and articles like this come out all the time, trying to explain in naturalistic terms how supposed miracles can be otherwise accounted for. Charles Darwin's books are nothing other than the most famous example of this genre. The miracle they seek to explain and debunk is the creation of life in its wondrous diversity.
Whatever you think of these materialist debunking jobs on their merits, there's a question I get hit with all the time in my work that I'd like to throw out to you for your opinion. Are miracles an insult to God?
In the evolution debate, a common charge against intelligent design is that it insults God by implying He set up His world so poorly that it requires constant modifications and inference to keep things going along the track He had in mind to begin with. You could make the same criticism of any alleged miracle -- that is, any interference by a transcendent creator or designer in the course of natural or human history.
Why did God have to "interfere" to make the sea part and save the Jews from the Egyptian army? Why not rely on nature, somehow "preprogrammed" into God's creative work from the beginning, to get the job done? Why not rely on, for example, "an eruption of a volcano off the Aegean island of Yali"? Isn't it beneath God to have to separate the waters Himself?
As Phillip Johnson summarizes this view (which is not his own):
The need to interfere, according to theological naturalism, is an indication of an incompetent designer -- as when, for example, an automobile has to be recalled by the manufacturer. By this standard, I suppose that the need for the incarnation of God in Jesus is evidence of a blunder of the worst kind, compared to which the need to provide the information stored in DNA is a trivial matter.
Rabbi Natan Slifkin give this view in his own criticism of intelligent design. Writes Slifkin in his very interesting and learned recent book The Challenge of Creation:
[Intelligent Design] would appear to be a slight to God's creative abilities. Was He incapable of designing laws [of nature] that cold accomplish all His objectives, and therefore had to interfere to bring about the results that He wanted?
As I said, in my work I hear and read arguments like this all the time. Someone could answer: Well, who am I to tell God how to do His work? But that has always struck me as a bit of a copout. I've been seeking a compelling positive reason that God would have -- as He or some designer seems to have done -- devised natural laws that are not sufficient by themselves to account for the course that life's history has taken.
In my reading and thinking over Passover, I came up with a theory on that. But first, I would love to have your view. Is it in any way a "slight to God" to think His laws are insufficient to get all the work of creation done? If so, why? If not, why not?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Clearly it won't do, as Hume showed, to argue that it is reasonable to infer, from testimony concerning the occurrence of a miracle, that the miracle in fact occurred. That said: it does not strike me as unreasonable for someone to think that, given that God exists, He chooses to introduce miracles into the natural order in order so that rational beings can know that the natural order is not all there is, and that the natural order is not the only dimension of the human condition.
God will support the righteous,if He find out they are that kind and
if the most iportant miracle of all worthy of love for each other, that way,that miracle called right and true love SURELY can be granted by the grantor,the God of love.
I got confused with my comment abov,all i am trying to say is i
believe in miracle,i believe that for righteous people,miracle is
never impossible,taking God as the judge to all of our hearts desires,
if we are found worthy to love and desserve each other's LOVE,
no matter what it takes,the miracle we hoping for shall come to pass.
There is God who guides our own destiny,He is a good God,He never
change,a God kind we need and expected,a God who knows our yearnings,
a God who is compassionate, a good who encourages,a God of patience,
etc.most of all,God of love.We cannot fathom the depth of God's
entire personality or being,but He reveals Himself if we listen closely to what our heart is saying,and pray without ceasing because
He answers prayers,in a very timely manner,out of His love for us,amen.(silently)
Carl, all Hume showed was that a naive approach to testimony doesn't work. Hume's "proof" against miracles as a method could also be used to prove that Carl Sachs doesn't exist. Of the total number of people on earth, most would certainly testify that they don't know anyone named Carl Sachs. The same method could be used to disprove all esoteric science experiments.
The Bible expects a non-naive approach to testimony--witnesses are to be carefully questioned by judges, who are to filter out non-corroborated testimony about empirical propositions.
The question about miracles being insulting appears to me to assume that God is a kind of watchmaker, rather than a father. A father is engaged with his children, while a watchmaker may forget about his creation. Miracles are an identification credential that lets us know that Father is paying attention to us.
The reason God has to 'interfere' is because satan is alive and well on earth and because man is a free moral agent and frequently makes decisions that go against God's teachings. This causes man to wind up in a tight spot, between a rock and a hard place, up the river without a paddle, etc., thereby needing God to help, save, rescue, and heal him. God's creation was perfect. When Adam bowed his knee to satan, committing treason, he opened the door to troubles and hardships for all of us. The most important lesson we can learn from Adam is what happens when we exalt our own will over God's.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.