Monday's Musings

Miracles are not to be interpreted as divine acts against the laws of nature (for those laws are themselves expressions of God's will) but as more profound revelations of the character of the divine relationship to creation. To be credible, miracles must convey a deeper understanding than could have been observed without them. ~ John Polkinghorne

To discuss this I felt like I needed to have a universal definition for 'law of nature'. According to Wikpedia it is defined in the following ways:

Law of Nature may refer to:
Physical law, a scientific generalization based upon empirical observation
Natural law, any number of doctrines in moral, political and legal theory
A theological doctrine concerning marriage and its role (or lack thereof), specifically in regard to the Immaculate Conception

So how do miracles fit into this? How about the fact that my pastor should have been dead from Stage IV Leukemia eight years ago? Or the accounts that we've heard from the mission field about dead people returning to life? How about the miracles that On Fire recently saw with her own eyes when she was in Mexico (some of which she hasn't blogged about)? Granted, I don't think these things oppose the laws of gravity or conservation of energy. They may not even go against laws of probability. But there could be some law or interpretation of a law out there that these acts defy. Does that mean they didn't happen? Certainly not. Especially when there are eyewitnesses to what has occurred.

So, then, is it really defined as miraculous?

According to John Polkinghorne, a miracle is only credible if a deeper understanding is conveyed and couldn't have been done so without a miracle. One issue I have with this is 'according to who' - who is the one that determines that a deeper understanding was not able to be conveyed? I'm not going to argue that this isn't applicable but part of me is opposed to putting God, the author of miracles, in a box. Maybe this is true and does apply...but I struggle with the attempt to define and bring logic to everything God does. It is here that I am reminded of Job. This doesn't necessarily apply to miracles but it does apply to the nature of God, our Creator and the one who created the same phenomena that we attempt to define and classify into laws. When Job ponders and questions God, ultimately God's response is (and I am super paraphrasing here) 'Job, you don't have the right to question me. I am God'. This doesn't seem like the response Job was looking for (or any of us may be looking for from time to time) but there have been many times that I remind myself "God is God".

So that's it. My thoughts on this quote. I certainly look forward to your responses. What do you think about miracles? Have you personally experienced one? Do you think the act of a miracle needs to meet Polkinghorne's line of thinking to be considered credible? I look forward to your comments and your own posts. I obviously haven't enlisted the help of Mr. Linky yet so if you post, leave a comment and tell us so that we can all check out your thoughts/pondering/questions/etc. And if you don't have a blog please feel free to write your post in the comments.

***Edited: I figured out how to add the Mr. Linky...so link away!***

I've borrowed one of On Fire's Inspirational quotes for next Monday's Musings:

"I set myself on fire and the people come to see me burn." ~John Wesley