|
Warning: Minor spoilers. Mel Gibson's character undergoes a paradigm shift (change of mind) based on a "miracle" M. Night Shyamalan has contrived for the ending of his movie. What's a miracle? Do such miracles occur? A miracle is a violation of the normal order of things. They can involve the impossible, or merely the highly improbable. In my experience, unlike magic tricks, God's miracles solve real problems while teaching an important theological point. As a child I had a Sunday school teacher named Vi Lurvey, a loving, kind, frail old lady. After knowing her for a while, She told us about something which had happened to her, and brought in the newspaper clippings about it for us to read. She'd been taken hostage by a gunman for several days. She's prayed for him, and told him about Jesus, and prayed for God to help her, too. As I remember it, at one point, he decided to end it all, and take her along too. But he discovered something had gone terribly wrong: His gun was visibly bent out of shape, to the point where it was unusuable. (I, the young skeptic, was very careful to get clarification on this point -- it she claimed it was bent in an obvious way they would have noticed it before.) Eventually, at her urging, he gave himself up to the police. Coincindence? Possibly: the laws of physics don't prevent a gun from going out of shape spontaneously. Its horribly, horribly unlikely, but not completely impossible. It could even happen at just the right time to save the life of a little old Christian lady who'd been praying to God for help. But that's less likely still -- we assume spontaneous gun-bending occurs a lot, and we just remember the cases where it saves little old ladies lives. Or both could have hallucinated the unbent state of the gun, and then snapped out of it at just the right point in the story to tell an important theological point. Lastly, Vi Lurvey could simply have been a pathological liar, and either conspired with her accomplish (and would-be gunman) to send him to prision and dupe the police, or she could have fabricated the story and newspaper clipping and got her relatives (who I knew) to back up the story, just to dupe me. James Randi tells me that these options are more likely than God's intervention. James Randi tells me this, because James Randi has already assumed his conclusion: Miracles cannot happen, their probability is near zero. But when I go in, assuming neither, I find reasonable evidence for miracles, and thus consider their implications. I can prove there is a God but Mr. James "The Amazing Liar" Randi doesn't think I can from 7000 miles away. Who thinks he's a mind reader? He's a coward. Posted by: Kevin C Gardner on July 30, 2003 08:24 PM If you think about it really, sheer coincidence has more standing than some deity casting miracles at some who pray but not at others. Posted by: James on December 16, 2003 01:26 PM
do not chastise a sweet old woman for volunteering her time to attempt to teach you something. the story my be inaccurate or exaggerated, but the moral is what should be remembered. you are an idiot. Posted by: tim lurvey on December 4, 2006 01:05 AM To Tim Lurvey - I don't think you understand Tim's position at all. Reread the article. He's not chastising anyone (excpet, perhaps, James Randi.) He considers a number of conclusions but ultimately sides with your Great Aunt's version of things as opposed to the other positions (which he assumes other people, like Randi, will take.) Posted by: Ryan on December 4, 2006 01:27 AM Add your two cents...
The comment rules will apply. Please post only once. |
Tim, I ran across your story about Vi Lurvey while doing some web searching. I too was a student of Vi's. She was an amazing woman.
I currently live in Kansas, but get back home on a yearly basis to visit the family. I've searched your website but not found your last name. Did you grow up in Ottawa Township. Do you still live in the area?
I'll be bookmarking your website. I've enjoyed the reading.
Posted by: Scott MacLeod on July 15, 2003 12:09 PM