Supernatural Miracles in relation to creation and te.

[charityagape]

It's a poll. Edit: Try not to use other, unless your answer is vastly different from any of the options listed.

 

[Willtor]

Other: TE - Most of the miracles in Scripture probably correspond to factual events (some of which, in actuality, are not explainable via natural means).

 

[charityagape]

Other: TE - Most of the miracles in Scripture probably correspond to factual events (some of which, in actuality, are not explainable via natural means).

Hmmm......could you elaborate.

Because of the some not being naturally explainable by natural means, do you mean that some or most were factual events that WERE explainable by natural means but when written down were somewhat exagerated?

 

[Willtor]

Hmmm......could you elaborate.

Because of the some not being naturally explainable by natural means, do you mean that some or most were factual events that WERE explainable by natural means but when written down were somewhat exagerated?

No. I'm saying that some of the things were natural events that were used by God for His purposes. The lion of 1 Kings 13, for example, may have been a simple marauding lion that was used for God's purpose in that instance.

Though, now that you mention it, there may have been miracles that were exaggerated for effect (parting of the Red Sea, maybe). At any point, if one wishes to make such a determination, one has to examine the story in its context. Even then, it's not really a given.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Other:

Any action by God, whether bending physical laws (supernatural) or using them (natural) are miracles and worthy of awe. Just because creation and maybe a few others may not have bent physical laws does not mean I am any less awed by them.

Some miracles my not have even happened, but are a literary device used to drive home a point, this IMHO does not let us ignore them, they are in the text, so even if they did not happen, they still are important and can teach us much.

 

[charityagape]

For the sake of the poll, could we all use other a little less. I realize with only ten available options limited to a hundred characters each, you're not going to get your exact taylor made option available, but the two answers above could have fit into an option other than other.

Probably most closely options two or five. A whole cluster of others so that you can give your word for word theology on the subject won't be a very good poll.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

I am sorry that I did not fall into you preconceived notions of what I as a TE should believe.

What of your choices do you feel I should have picked?

 

[charityagape]

I am sorry that I did not fall into you preconceived notions of what I as a TE should believe.

What of your choices do you feel I should have picked?

Ah, funny. It's a poll. It's a poll, its not about my preconceived notions about what you should believe, but gaining a perspective on what this or that group believes in general. Specifically every single person is going to believe slightly different than every other single person, and there just aren't that many options in the poll.

Now, your answer could have very easily fit options two or five, as I previously stated. I knew I shouldn't have put the other, it turns a poll into soapbox time about how you can't pigeon hole my specific beliefs. It's a poll, its very general.

Option Two: TE- most of the "supernatural" miracles of the bible probably had a more natural explanation.

Option Five: TE-outside of the virgin birth and resurrection, very few if any "supernatural" miracles took place.

Your Specific Answer: (Again a poll's pretty general and not very specific)

Any action by God, whether bending physical laws (supernatural) or using them (natural) are miracles and worthy of awe. Just because creation and maybe a few others may not have bent physical laws does not mean I am any less awed by them.

Some miracles my not have even happened, but are a literary device used to drive home a point, this IMHO does not let us ignore them, they are in the text, so even if they did not happen, they still are important and can teach us much.

First poll is talking about "supernatural" miracles, so as nice as it is that you are awed by God's creation both natural and supernatural, the miracles in question that happened or did not happen are "supernatural" miracles. Really no need for the bit about both being just as important and awe inspiring.

Now options two and five offer the suggestions that most "supernatural" miracles didn't happen or that few if any at all happened and you put some may not have happened.

So for clarification on that some, do you believe that most did happen (happen supernaturally) or most likely did not happen (supernaturally)?

Say walking on water? Feeding five thousand (supernaturally)? Turning water into wine? Healing, healing, healing? Coin in the fish's mouth? Transfiguration on the mount? Talking to demons? "Supernatural" knowledge of the woman at the well and the disciple under the tree?

 

[PaladinValer]

I agree with Willtor's answer, and LewisWildermuth's critique: I'm sorry that we do not fall into preconceived incorrect, false, and rather insinuative notions of what TEs believe or should believe.

 

[charityagape]

No. I'm saying that some of the things were natural events that were used by God for His purposes. The lion of 1 Kings 13, for example, may have been a simple marauding lion that was used for God's purpose in that instance.

Though, now that you mention it, there may have been miracles that were exaggerated for effect (parting of the Red Sea, maybe). At any point, if one wishes to make such a determination, one has to examine the story in its context. Even then, it's not really a given.

Wiltor, other than the red sea, what other supernatural miracles do you think may have been exaggerated?

This whole poll is in response to your claim that TE's very much believe in "supernatural" miracles, so I am a little curious as to why you'd go with the ambiguous other.

Wiltor: I think Jesus fed thousands, walked on water, raised people from the dead, cast out demons, calmed storms, etc. Shernren cites historical and psychological evidences in response to these things. I actually don't think you'll find any TE's on these forums who disagree (though, you might, but I'll let them post their views).

 

[charityagape]

I agree with Willtor's answer, and LewisWildermuth's critique: I'm sorry that we do not fall into preconceived incorrect, false, and rather insinuative notions of what TEs believe or should believe.

Yada, yada, yada. See post 8. It's a poll. I know you're very intellectual and very educated and feel every question must have a very thorough essay type answer, but get over yourself its a poll.

 

[charityagape]

I agree with Willtor's answer, and LewisWildermuth's critique: I'm sorry that we do not fall into preconceived incorrect, false, and rather insinuative notions of what TEs believe or should believe.

So, the options given, options that are identical for both C and TE are preconceived incorrect false and insinuative? In what way? Again, keep in mind this is a POLL and is not going to have an option taylor made to your specific line by line belief, be you C or TE.

The reason for this poll is very specific and in response to a statement from Wiltor and the poll is in order to find a GENERAL answer to that question.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

#2 TE- most of the "supernatural" miracles of the bible probably had a more natural explanation.

What is “supernatural”?

How can I tell “supernatural” apart from “unknown but natural cause”?

If we somehow can prove that some miracle is natural does that make it less of a miracle?

#5 TE-outside of the virgin birth and resurrection, very few if any "supernatural" miracles took place.

Same questions as #2.

How do you tell if God stopped the natural functioning of the universe to do something? Is it more special for God to stop the natural functioning of the universe to get His will done or to get His will done through using the natural functions of the universe?

So for me both two and five are totally inadequate and could lead someone to a false understanding about what I believe. Therefore to give a better understanding I used the “other” option.

Just because you feel that two or five are good enough does not mean that any of the rest of us do.

 

[Willtor]

Wiltor, other than the red sea, what other supernatural miracles do you think may have been exaggerated?

Good question. I don't know. (BTW - 2 'l's in Willtor)

This whole poll is in response to your claim that TE's very much believe in "supernatural" miracles, so I am a little curious as to why you'd go with the ambiguous other.

I didn't think there was anything ambiguous about my "other." I explained it, after-all. Seriously, I just didn't think any of the poll options adequately reflected my views. I'm not trying to be difficult. I just think the issue is more complex than you think it is.

If I had read your post (in the other thread) earlier, I might have responded how difficult it would be to do a poll on such things. You might have, instead, started a thread about miracles, and asked how people used this term. What TE's think about such things would have come out, in the end.

 

[jereth]

I don't think I agree with any of the options, but because you said:

"Try not to use other, unless your answer is vastly different from any of the options listed. "

... I chose option 1.

If the Bible explicitly claims something was a miracle (i.e. departure from known physical laws), it was a miracle. If the Bible describes an incredible event, but doesn't say it was a miracle, it is impossible to know whether a natural or supernatural mechanism is the explanation.

 

[Mark2010]

I suspect most of the events that happened are explainable if enough information is provided. Unfortunately, the people who wrote the Bible did not always give very complete descriptions, so we are left to sort of guess what might have happened.

Of course, every event is different and such a general answer in this poll cannot be taken to apply to every single incidence.

 

[chaoschristian]

It's a poll. Edit: Try not to use other, unless your answer is vastly different from any of the options listed.

CF Polls are fun and useful for measuring preference on single variables, such as:

Of the items listed, which one is your favorite vegetable to eat?

1. Carrots
2. Celery
3. Broccili
4. Green Onions

But if your purpose is to measure attitudes towards green onions, then this single poll will not provide a lot of useful information. You would need to create multiple polls and direct respondants to move from one poll thread to the next. Additionally, you would have to have all of the respondants for each of the polls respond to all of the polls for the data to yield any sort of results that could be seen as useful.

That or we need to convince Erwin to provide us with a survey building tool.

Your poll is seeking to gather data not on a simple preference, but rather to measure attitudes on a complex set of inter-related concepts.

Additionally your terms are undefined in the context of the poll itself. You've already had folks ask what you mean by certain terms, and rightly so.

Your target audience is a sophisticated one, and they can see that the poll isn't quite working.

That is not your fault. You are constrained by the severe limitations of the poll feature.

Let's go back to my veggie poll.

If I wanted to ask "Of the items listed which is your favorite vegetable to eat with dip?" you have to account for the phenomenon that people will base answers on their dip preferences. One person might say, 'Well it doesn't say what kind of dip, so if its ranch I'll answer carrots.' whereas another might select green onions on the assumption of bleu cheese. While all the time you were assuming sourcream and onions.

You have to be specific in defining your terms.

Finally, if you are going to create and post a poll you cannot admonish yor respondants when they don't respond the way you want them to respond. You provided 'other' as an option (perhaps because you know on some level how limited the poll feature is?) and if folks select that, you have to accept it.

Polls are for learning, not for teaching.

 

[shernren]

I tried my best to shoehorn myself into any of the alternatives and I thought the last one (before "other") was the easiest to start explaining from.

We don't have any really good reason to doubt that any of the miracles in the Bible happened if there is no reason to find physical evidence today that will contradict them. E.g. Jesus walks on water. We have no idea what physical constants He changed, how He changed them, and how long the effect lasted. In any case, we don't see anybody walking on water today, meaning that whatever physically happened has never happened again since. Therefore it would be really hard to disprove the historicality of Jesus walking on water.

On the other hand, the creation miracles YECs invoke would have left substantial evidence (unless one subscribes to Apparent Age-ism). TEs believe that the substantial evidence necessary to prove those creation miracles cannot be found today, in fact there appears to be substantial evidence against those creation miracles having happened in a detectable manner. Therefore given the existence of plausible alternative theological views we don't fancy YECism.

I think chaoschristian was right. A simple "what do you think about ... ?" question with you making clear that you didn't want debate posts would have done well or better. But I think that yes, you do have the right to know how we think, and I hope the written responses here have helped you there

 

[Assyrian]

I would go for other too.
The choices are very limited and three are almost identical.

We have the 'liberal theology' options:
TE-outside of the virgin birth and resurrection, very few if any "supernatural" miracles took place.
TE-not even sure about the virgin birth.


Then TEs who don't fall into that pigeon hole have a choice of:
TE- all miracles discribe in the bible not relate to Genesis happened.
The bible may not tell us how they happened, they may have happened providentially like the man eating lion, or the plague of locusts, or they may be a direct supernatural intervention like the miracle of the loaves and fishes.

TE- most of the "supernatural" miracles of the bible probably had a more natural explanation.
TE-except Genesis, all "supernatural" miracles of bible literally happened and still happen today.
Who labels a miracle supernatural or natural? Unless the bible labels it, these two choices are asking about TE attitudes to YEC labels. So, yes, many of the miracles YECs would tend to call supernatural may have involved natural processes that God used providentially. And yes all genuinely supernatural miracles of bible genuinely happened and can still happen today. So do the providential ones.

Nice try, but you need a better handle on TE attitudes to how God works.

Assyrian

 

[chaoschristian]

Here's my response to the spirit of the poll, if not the letter of the poll:

Hypothetically assume that science can and has either falsified or verified every single event in scripture, especially those which we lable 'miraculous.'

For example: Hypothetically assume that science has falsified the concept of 'The Flood.'

For example: Hypothetically assume that science has verified that the dead can be brought back to life (Walt Disney's head says 'W00T!')

Hypothetically assume that all of the emperical, natural 'mysteries' of 'The Bible' are now no longer mysterious, but either known as having had happened or not having had happened.

Where does that leave my faith in God? Exactly where it is now, fully intact and as strong as I allow God's grace to make it.

Beyond the natural 'facts' of scripture and the theological hisSTORY of Christianity lies the metaphysical mysteries that science can still not touch. Can science falsify or verify God's Grace, the Trinity, eternal salvation? Can science falsify or verify the Kingdom?

No.

My faith, while not irrational, is not based on the need for rational proof or naturalistic elements. My faith is based upon God's Grace which came upon me at the time of God's choosing and remains with me to this day through means that I cannot comprehend. A means that science by its very nature must remain mute.