I have told you in my introductory article ("How These Accounts of Miracles can offer Hope to You") how, since the pandemic struck, I have been doing most of my evangelism online. Doing this, I have run into quite a few atheists who assert that for them to not consider my stories of miracles is just like me not considering the accounts of fairies and the like. In this article, I would like to address that line of thinking and assert that, to the contrary, we should generally give consideration to accounts that are important to other people.
To cut to the chase, I will quote what one person online told me. He said “it is not necessary to believe that which lacks good evidence.” Right away, I urged him to change this to something a little more helpful. Why? Well, to say something isn’t “necessary” is not saying very much. It isn’t necessary for anyone to do any number of things that would be very very good for them to do. Graduating highschool? Not necessary. A person can still survive and find plenty to live for, perhaps. (You may also pick up on something that I will delve into in a bit… saying “not necessary” makes me want to respond with “necessary for what”)? Quitting smoking? Not necessary. We all die someday. I could give more examples, but you see my point.
A much more helpful question is asking about what is best. Phrased this way, we could assert “it is best to not believe in anything that does not have good enough evidence.” Ok. That is quite a bit more helpful. And actually, I agree! Assuming you agree with me on what “good evidence” is! The problem now (other than my previously mentioned question of “best for what?”) is that “good enough evidence” seems subjective. Good enough for what decision?
Anyway, by now you can see how these topics of belief and evidence can get pretty deep pretty quickly. We went from what seemed like a discussion on what was allegedly silly (fairies and an “invisible sky friend” named God) to what the meaning of life should be. Of course the two topics are related! But often I find that atheists want to oversimplify things and say that “all atheism is is to not believe in any god because there is not enough evidence to believe in any of them.” But the implications of atheism indeed proclaim much more and are complex indeed. They impact the very meaning of living the life we have.
What is my solution? My solution is that we look to the beliefs that people tend to hold as important, and then look at what evidence they have for holding those beliefs, and by that we can decide what kinds of evidence are valid for different kinds of decisions about belief.
My online conversation continues to be a practical example for us: I still went on and asserted that belief in God has much better evidence than belief in fairies. Another atheist (commenting on my conversation with the pervious person) said they have the same evidence and couldn't see much difference between the evidence available for believing in one over the other. He said that, just like people believe in God, there are people who believe in fairies. He ended up giving me two sources for examples of people who believe in fairies. One was of a society that is still around. I checked it out, and quickly found out that, to this group, belief in fairies isn’t all that important. The group doesn’t require members to actually confess to believing in fairies. And they are a secret society. To me, there was no further need to check them out. It is not at all the same as when I ask someone to go to church with me where the members must confess to belief in Jesus. One group is for entertainment. The other for moral guidance. Obviously one needs evidence and the other doesn’t so much.
The next source he gave me was a book by Arthur Conan Doyle that spoke of photographs of some children with fairies and the related stories about these children interacting with fairies. Doyle seemed quite sincere and the man I was chatting with said that this is an example of someone who takes this belief quite seriously and that it is important enough to him to put his name on the book as a well known author. This, to me, did require further examination, just as I wish for people to consider what I say. In that way the beliefs are the same, and I agreed to that extent (even though I don’t think the atheist I was chatting with was sincere at all but instead bluffing - the atheist seemed to not have even read any of the book because he seemed unaware of what was inside). Well, after reading the first chapter of Doyle’s book, I was able to know exactly what Doyle thought. He thought that the photos were genuine, but admitted that they could be hoaxes, because, after all, he was only trusting in those who took the photos and had not experienced the fairies himself. Well, it turns out that, long after Doyle died, those who were in the photograph (as children) admitted that the photos were hoaxes that were made with cardboard cutouts of fairies.
To me this highlights another way to discern concerning claims of miracles. One way was importance. The other way is the source of the info. Doyle may have been quite sincere (and did practice spiritualism). But he didn't know as well as the subjects of the photos. He actually has a reasonable belief that they could be hoaxes.
So how does this relate to Christian belief and the claims of the apostles about the miracles of Jesus? Well, they were eyewitnesses- original sources of the claims. They never did recant, as far as we know, in spite of facing persecution and death for these beliefs. And the difference is of course clear to see: they would know whether or not they were lying. Doyle didn’t know if those in the photos were lying. So his account, being second-hand, is not as strong in evidence as the first-hand account of the apostles. And this is one strait-forward case as to why that makes a big difference.
There are so many sincere adherents to every religion. People who are indeed willing to die for their beliefs. But, sadly, many of these people have been deceived. Which is why it is important to do what Jesus tells us to and beware false teachers, examining them by their fruit. If those who are first-hand sources give any hint of manipulation or deception, then we need to beware. It is possible to see how Joseph Smith and Muhammed had quite a different agenda than the apostles by just looking at the lives they lead and how they lead the people who followed them. And how they responded when criticized or even faced with death!
Those are some of the ways to discern between different claims of miracles. Some claims may be lies. Some supernatural things may have happened but be from demonic sources. And some others may have happened and be good evidence for what God is doing in the world.
You still may be unconvinced, however, that it is even necessary to look into claims of miracles at all. As were the people who I had this conversation with online. Well, even though they would still in the end not admit that it mattered, I was able to show them how they, if being consistent and fair concerning the reasons why they believed what was important to them, should not discredit accounts of miracles as silly talk or not worth their time. This is where I took the conversation next (with both of these people)…
I went back to the idea that “it is only best to believe in what has good evidence.” And that, if someone is taking the time to have a long conversation with me online, that they find it important to get some kind of message across to me. In other words, their actions reveal a belief they have. And it is this: those who would spend a long time talking with me online about how they think I don’t have good evidence to believe in Jesus themselves believe that it is a good thing for me to move on from Christianity and spend more time and thought and other resources on secular goals.
While I didn’t get this far with those two that day (although I tried to finish my thought for them), I bring this argument up often and people often do volunteer reasons for their belief that it would be good for me to move on from Christianity. And every one of these reasons is either a personal anecdote or an argument based off of some historical event(s). In sharing these reasons for wanting to convince people to move on from Christianity and “progress” to either being more “scientific” (so that I can “actually help” instead of “just” pray) and/or “tolerant” or “peaceful,” they admit that anecdotes are valuable and that historical evidence is worth looking at when forming beliefs.
Another way to say it is that science alone cannot tell us what is best to do. Unless we want to go through life with no objective measure for “good” or “bad,” we have to step aside from science for a moment and at least enter the realm of philosophy. Philosophically, miracles are by no means eliminated as impossible or unworthy of consideration. You can hear the phenomenally thorough argument of Craig S. Keener (which is admittedly tougher to access) or the quite easy-to-access argument of William Lane Craig. (Philosophy also exhibits some of the best arguments for a Creator, One that is concerned with our morals, at that). Throw into this the fact that most every person (and certainly everyone I’ve ever met) finds personal stories and/or history important to support something they believe, then it is quite clear that accounts of miracles need not be thrown to the wayside but looked at, just as you would listen to someone tell of how misguided religion has done them wrong.
Anyway, as the article moves much closer to an end, let me share another account of a miracle, since I want to do that with every article I write. This miracle is an example of one that, while to me it does support the notion that God is real and that He listens to our prayers, is less important than some others. This is my way of saying that if I have convinced you that history has important evidence for us, instead of taking too much time to think about the miracle I am going to share with you, take the time to really look into the claims of the resurrection of Christ. (William Lane Craig is again a good resource, as is Mike Licona, among many many others. Even Bart Ehrman gives a fair, albeit agnostic, case for the apostles experiencing SOMETHING). These claims are well supported historically, meaning that for you to deny that the first followers of Jesus who saw Him while He walked the earth claimed that they also saw Him after He died on the cross is to deny so so many other things in history that are well accepted by the community of historians and never questioned. You can question if Jesus came back to life - that will still be up to your preference I suppose (or as I like to call it, your faith in one thing or another). But you must admit that his followers died to avoid recanting the idea that they saw Him alive in His body after his crucifixion. And choose some other explanation for that behavior. Most people choose something that I find quite less believable than resurrection, considering that this wouldn’t be the only supernatural claim in history but one of a myriad. The most important one though, for sure.
Now to the miracle account I want to share. In college I was friends and classmates with a Mennonite man named Timothy. Timothy is not only a man who was always very careful and serious about his way of life- his speech and his conduct being proper and true. He is also a man who was quite serious about his engineering. He is an accomplished engineer and was a very successful student in his mathematics, science, and engineering coursework. He is also a bit of a mountain man. A simple man. But a man who loves adventure.
He was telling some of us friends of his a story one time about one of his adventures. He was driving home for the holidays, which for him was a trip longer than one day could handle. Instead of staying at a hotel, he would always camp out on public land, in the open bed of his pickup truck, with the stars as his ceiling. One particular night, he could see in the sky the signs of coming rain. Knowing that it would be quite unpleasant for him if it did rain during this cold season of the year, he prayed that God would keep him dry for the night. And as the darkness slowly set in, he could see the rain falling on the horizon before him. As he looked up, however, he saw clear sky and the first of the night’s stars. Turning around to look the other way, again he saw rain on the horizon. All around him, rain was falling in each direction. But above him were clear skies. And he was dry. Eventually the rain around him stopped. And the night became calm until morning.
Why do I believe this miracle to be true? Well, first of all, Timothy would know whether or not he was lying. I do not. And so I must admit that he COULD be. But, lying about this would be totally counter to Timothy’s character, as far as I know based off of knowing Timothy and knowing what reputation he had among all of us who knew him at the university. And why do I think it is a miracle? Well, Timothy, who grew up within a farming community and also has a good general understanding of how nature works as an engineer, considered it to be a miracle. He said there is no way that the storm around him was acting as it was and yet he remained dry except for the case that God intervened and decided to keep him dry by affecting the weather.
Of course if God did not respond positively to Timothy’s request, it would not mean God is cruel. Maybe the land Timothy was on desperately needed the moisture. Well, apparently in this case God could afford to and was delighted to honor Timothy’s request. And to me it shows us that God does answer prayers, sometimes exactly as we would have Him to (although this is not automatic or even common).
Anyway, I bet for Christians this miracle may be a small encouragement. To seekers, I am not sure it will be overwhelmingly convincing. But maybe somehow it helps a little. It does serve as one more model for us about discernment. Timothy was alone. (The resurrection sightings of Jesus have many witnesses [and the crucifixion even more]). And, like I said, Timothy's miracle simply doesn't hold quite the same importance that some others that have been recorded in history do. Most notably, the resurrection of Jesus- a claimed miracle that did in fact change the world, in my informed opinion, for the better for sure. (See Tom Holland's book DOMINION for more on that). Please take the time to look into it if you have not. To ignore it is to have a double standard about what is evidence and what is important.
Comments