I Believe In Miracles

I've left behind, forever behind, the old paradigm of pitiful humans pleading, cajoling, attempting to bargain with an old all-powerful (but apparently fickle) "man in the sky." I'm being a bit unkind there, for that isn't the way traditional religious believers think of it. It is however how I came to think about it. I didn't start with the traditional view. As a child I was an animist. Of course I soon absorbed the religious ideas of my parents (traditional theism). Now as an old guy I'm coming around again to my earlier view, but hopefully with more insight.

Oh, I still think about a higher power - okay, call it God, if you will. Use the metaphor of an old gray haired and bearded man as a metaphor if you must. But as an idealist, I think of a Supreme Mind. And I think of the Cosmos as being crackling alive and imbued with a kind of intelligence in all its aspects.

I believe there is a way of the Cosmos with which we should attune ourselves. Maybe something like Taoism's Way or Path.

About three years ago a path out of a serious problem I had been having was presented to me. With much fear I pursued that path to the resolution of my problem. I prayed about it, or as I also think of it: I communicated with the Supreme Mind of the Cosmos. This event led me to a complete re-examination of my worldview and re-evaluation of my ideas about religion and spirituality. My journey continues.

A friend read mine read my last post and told me I had left her wanting more. What does it mean for miracles to be in the eyes of the beholders?

For me it is the difference between the spiritual and the materialist worldviews. Either one is convinced that the Cosmos is a pure accident with no intrinsic meaning, or it is not an accident and instead is purposeful.

Okay, we can look at events and say either "hey, this means something"; or we can dismiss sign posts as coincidences. Now I'm speaking as a spiritually-minded person and not a materialist.

There seems to me no need to spend too much time arguing about the matter. Where we end up depends entirely on where we start. If you believe blind coincidence can give us this wondrous Cosmos, okay. If you are like me and find some "coincidences" to be just too coincidental, then you'll open your mind to the possibility that as Sir James Jeans put it, the "universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine."

We have to look at all this from the inside out. I believe in an inner voice. Listen or overrule it. The choice is yours.

It seems to me that children start out with an enchanted view of the Cosmos. That is either nourished and tweaked by one of the various religious traditions. Or the enchantment gets educated right out of that child over time. We tend to see what we look for. Look for the divine and you will find overwhelming evidence for it. Dismiss the divine and you will find ample reason to continue dismissing it.

As the poet Keat wrote in his Lamia:

Philosophy will clip an Angel's wings.
Conquer all mysteries by rule and line,
Empty the haunted air, and gnomed mine--
The tender-person'd Lamia melt into a shade.

I see direction. I find meaning. I believe in miracles in the sense that things can fall into place in unusual ways. But if you don't believe you won't see. Or to quote the late Wayne Dyer: "I'm realistic; I expect miracles."

Miracles In The Eye Of The Beholder

I have long suspected that when the majority of us speak of miracles we are talking not so much about events that violate the known laws of nature as events that have special meaning, either because of the timing or unlikeliness of said events.

A case in point is this item from Father Dwight Longenecker that has had me thinking lately.  I urge you to click that link to see the picture and read the story.

The skeptic would say "so what?" But the people who were there and witnessed this event in person have obviously found deep meaning in it.

I don't think it wise to waste time arguing with the skeptic.The natural minded person is just bound to see things differently from the spiritually-minded person - and I think that's fine. It's a difference of perspective. Live and let live.

For the spiritually-minded person the Cosmos is a miracle of sorts, pointing directly to an intelligence behind it. Therefore we think there is meaning and significance to be found in all this. For that reason the concept of miracles - or unusual meaningful events - make perfect sense to us, even if it is only in the eyes of the beholders.

Easter Baloney

I was tempted to a do an Easter post yesterday but declined. Later I was playing catch-up with some of my blogging friends blogs.  Over at Bruce Gerencsers blog he posted an interesting chart about contradictions in the Easter story as contained in the canonical gospels. (I followed the link he provided over to Jericho Brisance's blog, from whence the chart came.)

In common with those two bloggers I am a former Christian. They now identify as Atheists. It's hard for me to define myself religiously speaking now. Labels sometimes aren't very helpful. I suppose I'm a cultural Christian. Christianity certainly is my heritage and the tradition I'm most familiar with. But I tend to want to identify myself as a Unitarian (at least of sorts.) To expand on that, I believe there is one spiritual reality towards which we humans (at least those of us who are spiritually inclined) aspire.

That being said, I have a curiosity about what happened to inspire the theology of the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. I confess to being agnostic about whether Jesus literally rose from the dead in a miraculous fashion. But a chart such as the one I referred to above - while helpful for consolidating in handy fashion all the alleged contradictions in the resurrection story (it really is a first-class, impressive piece of work) - is of little use for me in attempting to decide what may have happened.

I can't fathom such a presentation would change a single mind of those who had sincerely committed to the faith. It might make biblical inerrantists uncomfortable, but would probably only cause them to dig in deeper.

For the already skeptic, it is just preaching to the choir. It will provide some ammo with which to shock and awe your Christian friends, family and acquaintances. But again, I just don't think that approach does much but build ill will.

 Faith must first be truly shaken to allow one to seriously entertain truly negative thoughts.

Because I think myths and legends usually have a basis in something substantial, I believe something unique inspired the biblical Easter story. For some time I have been exploring the so-called "Swoon" theory. Well, more accurately, the idea that Jesus did not die on the cross but survived his crucifixion and revived later in the tomb. I think it would explain a lot. (Not being an inerrantist, of course contradictions in the gospels aren't a problem to me.)

Let's be honest. The reason atheists reject the resurrection of Jesus isn't because there are inconsistencies in the accounts. It is because they reject miracles outright.

I don't rule out of hand such miracles as the resurrection. But to be honest, my personal theological outlook doesn't require such things. Therefore I'm free to explore these accounts with a more open mind than either the conservative Christian or the Atheist.

Certainly I think there are plenty of documented cases of people who had been declared dead, given up for dead, presumed dead, etc., who have revived as opposed to people who had been dead for three days coming back

Being preserved through such a harrowing ordeal as Roman crucifixion would be no small matter. Had such a preservation occurred in the Jesus case, it surely would have seemed to those who knew him that he had - if not literally returned from the dead -  returned from death's very door. A person of faith would have no problem attributing such to an act of God.

I have studied the works of the mythicists and find their case not only not compelling, but actually weak. Of course that is a matter of opinion, but it is mine.

Christianity has had a big impact on world history for two millennia. That seems to me a lot to account for with a mere mythical figure. (Which is why I think even some mythicists have been willing to admit that it's very possible there was a historical Jesus about whom such legends grew.)

Also, I find the many parallels in the various religions as added evidence for my conviction: there is one spiritual reality common to all but understood in many different ways.

My spirituality is derived from the various myths, legends, fables and so forth that fills every religious tradition. I think we humans crave stories, symbols, icons and such things to satisfy their deepest yearnings.

Even if the resurrection of Jesus is nothing more than myth and legend, it still fills a spiritual need that I think is significant. Therefore, I believe I do take the resurrection story seriously. What I don't do is use this issue as a recruiting tool.