 | |||||
| Some people might consider telekenesis, the hypothetical act of levitating a material object with one’s mind, as miraculous. What does it mean for something to be a miracle? |
The subject of miracles can be an issue of great controversy--controversy that is only amplified by the fact that, as with most things, few truly wield rationality when they consider the matter. As with all other inquiries, definitions must be accurate when contemplating the possibility of miracles. A miracle is simply a suspension of a natural law. And what, then, is a natural law? It is a law that governs some aspect of how matter behaves. In this context, the phrases "natural law" and "scientific law" are completely interchangeable, since they both refer to laws that describe matter-based phenomena in the external world.
There is nothing intrinsically necessary, inviolable, or universal about scientific laws to begin with. With or without a deity, they could change in an instant. Logic, not science, is the key to understanding possibility and impossibility. The scientific method contains abundant limitations, including the inability to prove anything about natural phenomena in the past, the future, and even natural phenomena in the present moment outside of the minuscule parts of the external world being immediately perceived. Consequently, anyone who looks to science to determine whether or not miracles are possible is not even using the right tool. It is a simple matter to demonstrate that possibility and impossibility are dictated and revealed by logic, not by arbitrary, limited sensory perceptions.
The laws of logic cannot be violated--there can never be such a thing as something that is not what it is or a sound conclusion that does not follow from its premises. A thing cannot exist and not exist simultaneously, I cannot be dreaming and awake simultaneously, I cannot be married and not married to the same person at the same time, and so on. But these things are not miracles. They are contradictions. However, there is no contradiction in a material object ceasing to decay over time, gravity reversing itself when I wake up tomorrow, or water suddenly becoming incapable of freezing. Repeated experiences with natural laws do not mean that natural laws must hold in the future or that they could not have been drastically different than they presently are. Again, only the laws of logic must hold by necessity, not the laws of the natural world.
The mistake that some non-theists make when addressing miracles is that they erroneously conclude that miracles are logically impossible and that therefore they cannot occur, whereas Christians (and other theists by extension) might erroneously conclude that miracles are logically impossible and that they still can occur. Miracles are possible and it is objectively impossible for even a deity to do all things; the kind of omnipotence that grants the ability to do absolutely anything is something that cannot exist whatsoever [1].
It might be surprising to some to discover that the topic of miracles is actually a tangent issue to theism itself. Theism is simply a brute fact about reality, if one uses theism as a reference to the existence of an uncaused cause [2]. An uncaused cause exists because there cannot not be one, just like there cannot not be such a thing as logic, truth, or space. Miracles do not need to be demonstrated to exist in order to demonstrate that a deity (an uncaused cause) exists because the existence of a deity does not in any way necessitate the existence of miracles--and vice versa. It is intriguing to note how many people never mention this.
Miracles are inescapably possible, yet they can never occur in a way that involves contradiction, irrespective of how much either atheists or theists might object. It does not require years of contemplation to realize these things. They can be grasped and proven quickly.
[1]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/08/is-omnipotence-possible.html
[2]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-uncaused-cause.html
Hmmm...man I'd be very careful when flippantly stating what God can and can't do, especially as it seems you're simply imitating William Lane Craig nearly word for word here, and elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteWhat did Jesus say??? "...with God ALL THINGS are possible." (Matt 19:26) And just for the sake of clarity the Greek translated as "all things" is "pas" - which literally means "any and every, of every kind" according to Strong's.
Oh, but you (and Craig) say that God can't make a logical contradiction...why not? Can God make 1+1=3? Sure: man, woman, child. Notice that the limitations you've put on God are either based on language or sensory perception, in other words interpretation. Can a shirt be all green and all blue at the same time? Of course, haven't you heard of Yanny vs Laurel? Mathematics are easily the purest form of logic that we can grasp...and it's arbitrary, God is not subject to numbers (or any language) but instead that's simply a system he's established. Does logic as we know it exist anywhere outside of the human mind? Does the color green mean anything to bacteria???
To properly frame any such argument is to realize and recognize that we don't directly experience what we call reality, but instead we are living in a 3D movie that our nervous system is generating inside of our dark skulls...it's simply an interpretation that is highly massaged and highly distorted according to our history, our expectations, our values, our physiology, etc. What we typically refer to as logic is really just a system of symbols and language to attempt to make sense of our experience - which is far more emotional than logical in nature just because of the way the psyche is structured. Hence the reason why far more emphasis is placed on the heart than the mind in the Bible.
Maybe this is why Proverbs 3:5 says: Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
As for whether God could create a stone so big he couldn't lift it...hmm well the Bible says that God is Spirit and that he is omnipresent, then what would it even mean for him to lift anything?! But then God is also the man Jesus and Jesus being a man obviously can't lift a mountain...BUT he did say that with faith you could say to a mountain to throw itself into the sea and it would obey. Can God create something that won't obey? Man...
See?
Just because God can do ALL things, doesn't mean he's compelled to answer foolish and ignorant questions. And just because William Lane Craig says something that sounds like reasonable faith doesn't make it right. Right?
Where the hell did I allude to William Lane Craig in this post? Imitating him “word for word?” Craig is thoroughly wrong on many issues, as are all other Christian apologists I know of. I’ve only mentioned him in a few of my 550+ posts, and when I did mention him it was practically always to refute something he said.
DeleteYou can call one plus one three, but you’ve only changed the word you used for the end of the equation, since the concept will always remain unchanged. Are you seriously implying that a child coming from a man and woman means that God can make one plus one equal three? Mathematics is not arbitrary because it is a numeric function of logic and logic is not arbitrary. Logic is a set of necessary laws, not a language or a set of subjective perceptions. Language can express logic, but it is not logic itself. Of course logic exists, by necessity, independent of consciousness and matter.
Logic exists, my consciousness exists, space exists, and matter exists. It’s not as if these are uncertain things. That I have intelligible experiences at all is a part of objective reality. How do you know other beings even experience emotion at all? Are you just assuming that? If you are indirectly admitting that you base your worldview on emotion, why should anyone listen to you?
Again, what the hell is this bullshit about William Lane Craig? There are no appeals to authority here. As I said, when I do mention him it’s almost always to refute a part of his worldview.
I could have only read this blog post, with no mention of Craig, and no others, and immediately guessed, correctly, that you're familiar with his works and likely have watched at one of his debates. Or maybe you guys are just reading the same books, because the structure of your presentation including specific examples are nearly identical. But for whatever it's worth, I'll grant that you might not be consciously aware of parroting, because we all do it to some degree.
ReplyDeleteAnd this gets into the answer to your question as to how I, or anyone, know other being experience emotion at all? Primarily mirror neurons.
You'd do well to study the nervous system and realize and recognize that aside from the possibility of being sanctified and counseled by the divine, your thoughts and feelings and limited will are a product of the world - be it a seemingly unique mix of nurture and nature.
What is creative originality? Where does it come from???
With enough introspection, you'll come to realize that you and ALL of us base our worldview on emotion, on the heart(Proverbs 4:23). Even if you identify yourself as a rational logical man, you've simply somewhere in your (likely forgotten) past unconsciously associated good feelings with being logical which has been (and seeks to continue to be) reinforced with positive emotions as rewarded by blasts of dopamine - if only to boost your self-esteem.
Man, just look at your emotionally riddled response here...haha,so notice it's really just a matter of realizing and recognizing our human condition and then leveraging the motive power of emotions on yourself and others to make your life and the world a better place.
You assume I even read books about miracles, when I don’t think I’ve ever read a single one! I mostly discover truths through logic, and I scarcely pay attention to apologists except to refute various things I learn they said. I like reflecting on and writing about things that most pastors or philosophers rarely or never bring up.
DeleteNothing about deep emotionality (not everyone has deep emotions, though) displaces or contradicts deep rationality. Your worldview, or at least what I’ve seen of it here and elsewhere, is almost purely arbitrary and is perhaps completely emotion-based, but don’t pretend like that means everyone else has emotion-based worldviews too. Not everyone does. It does not follow from you being a certain way that everyone else is too.