Miracles and Science in Five Parts

The following is from a series by Ard Louis at Biologos:

___

Unbelievable, isn't it, that there are still students at this university who believe in stories from the Bible, said Martin, an older colleague, at one of the formal dinners around which the traditional life of Oxford University revolves. But Martin, I answered, their faith probably doesn't differ much from mine. I can still see his face go pale while he nearly choked on his glass of St. Emilion Grand Cru Classé: How can you believe in such things nowaday-- Walking on water, a resurrection from the dead? Those are miracles, and aren't you a scientist?

Read the entire post, "Miracles and Science, Part 1," here.

___

Rather than attempt to come up with a careful and precise definition of science or scientific practice, I will instead resort to a favorite metaphor of mine. It originates with one of my former teachers at Cornell, the physicist David Mermin, who describes science as a "tapestry" woven together from many threads (experimental results, interpretations, explanations, etc.). It is only when one examines the tapestry as a whole that it will (or will not) make a convincing pattern.

Read the entire post, "Miracles and Science, Part 2," here.

___

How can we then judge whether or not the miracles of the Bible are reliable? Since the word miracle has taken on so many different meanings, it is important to first examine the biblical language.

The New Testament predominantly uses three words for miracle:

• teras, a wonder
• dunamis, an act of power
• semeion, a sign

Read the entire post, "Miracles and Science, Part 3," here.

___

Given that almost every great Christian thinker in history has emphasized the fact that miracles must be understood within the context of a theological purpose, perhaps one could invert this argument and say that it is not surprising that the central event in history [the resurrection of Jesus] would be miraculous.

Read the entire post, "Miracles and Science, Part 4," here.
___
"By getting rid of the miracle stories in the Bible, Bultmann and his followers hoped to make the Christian story more palatable to modern man. Although I recognize the emotional weight of this sentiment, I am not convinced that it is an intellectually coherent approach, mainly for reasons of self-consistency. If the New Testament itself asserts, both directly and indirectly, that the historicity of the resurrection is foundational to Christianity, then it would seem to stand or fall by that fact."
___
Read the entire post, "Miracles and Science, Part 5," here.