Re: [asa] Miracle healing?

Quoting Iain Strachan <igd.strachan@gmail.com>:
> Even then, as the years passed, I never forgot the incident, but the
> scientist in me instinctively sought other rational explanations.
> Maybe, I thought, in complete ignorance of arthritis, it was an attack
> that passed off at that moment. Maybe it was a placebo effect. etc.
> Then many years later I told it to a physiotherapist, also a
> Christian, who told me not to be daft; of course it was a miracle -
> with arthritis, you don't just get mobility back like that.
>
> The moral of the whole tale is that as scientists, we have to doubt;
> to question. Not to do so would be to fail at being scientists; and
> to fail at being honest - to fall into the trap of seeing what we want
> to see. But how, as scientists, should we respond to the miracles
> that have been described; Christine's original example; the BBC
> announcer with the leg healed (and as a scientist I note that the
> "one leg shorter than the other" is a common healing that sceptics
> often say is the oldest trick in the book), and my own personal
> testimony given above?
>
> Iain
>

Those are great examples ---and why not praise God for them? At least if they
aren't hoaxes. It's hard to know regarding the U-tube incident. But personal
experience like yours with the woman's stiff hands are a good testimony.

Even if your 'rationalisations' were well-founded (maybe it was psychosomatic,
and her faith really made her fingers 'limber' up), would this make it less of a
healing event? God designed our bodies and minds too, so their performance is
still a cause for praise even if that does make it less significant to those of
non-Christian skepticism. A couple miracles in the Bible seem to mention
physical process. Peter or John take the beggars hands and help him up before
he goes leaping and dancing. A boost of confidence initially? Or even more
thought-provoking: Jesus spits, makes the mud, salves his eyes with it, and
then asks (just as your local family doctor would) about the results of his
treatment. On learning that it didn't quite take yet, Jesus applies a second
treatment to finish the job. What's that all about? Or also in Mark, we learn
that 'He could do no miracle there because of their lack of faith.' (A former
pastor of ours said Mark is his favorite gospel because the writer is sort of
like the young child who says the embarrassing (and revealing) things at the
dinner table.) So while some sneer about all this, why not embrace the idea
that God often uses physical events to accomplish his purposes?

The movie "Leap of Faith" with Steve Martin as a fraudulent faith healer may
seem, at first glance, to be mocking Christianity. But I saw a deeper and more
profound subtext in the movie that did justice to wrestling with these issues
and did not end up being dismissive of all things religious. I would recommend
it to most anyone.

--Merv

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri May 23 21:39:43 2008