Saturday, 06 October 2007
-
Miracles: Finger or Snot?
(After a hiatus, time spent rethinking the purpose and style of this blog and achieving some goals in meatspace, Widows_and_Ravens is back with a new entry!)
Pretty much everyone in orthodox Christianity (a generous assumption here on my part) believes in miracles. And, in that group that believe in miracles, pretty much everyone has the same definition of a miracle. It sounds something like this: a point in time and space where God’s love and sovereignty come together to right a wrong, bring justice, create a better situation, etc…for the kingdom of God. If it doesn’t sound quite like that, it sounds something similar, and means something about the same. As far as I can tell.
However, when it comes to how miracles happen (leaving behind the discussion of why for another time), there seem to be two differing viewpoints. Maybe there are more, but they seem to fall into these two categories, broadly speaking.
First, there is the view that God, in God’s transcendence of all things created, intervenes on the behalf of God’s people, either upon supplication or of God’s own decision. This view is best visualized in the painting of the Sistine Chapel Ceiling, that famous picture where the finger of God is reaching down to Adam (who, for some reason is hanging out naked on some shellfish—that’s not even kosher). Hence, it will be called the Finger Theory. God’s miracles are an intervention of God from outside the space-time continuum, and are achieved through external manipulation of events, from an overarching view of time, space, and the created beings within each.
Second, there is the view that God is living in God’s kingdom, and God’s miracles emanate from that very organic relationship. These manipulations of creation are not from the outside in. Rather, they are from the inside out, and are an outflow of the constant interaction that God has with God’s kingdom residents. The best analogy I can think of for this outflow model is that miracles are God’s snot. This will be called the Snot Theory.
Now, why snot? Because, in the human body, snot (or mucus to be more medically correct) is produced without any purposed input, unlike urine or feces, which require a purposeful consumption of either a fluid or a solid (plus, I’d probably get a lot more argument if I were to call miracles God’s Poop). It is a healing byproduct of the body. It is used to change things for the better and make things good again. I realize it gets a bad wrap, has a bad reputation, and can even make some people puke. But I think it fits.
God’s miracles are a byproduct of God’s being. Being in relationship with creation, in relationship with time and space, in relationship (perhaps most of all) with God’s Kingdom. Snot is a byproduct of a human body, which is made of cells, which are made of carbon. Therefore, I can say, in one sense at least, that Humans are carbon. God is love. Why can’t God’s byproducts be miracles? What else would the by product of a being made of Love be? Because in one sense, if God is love, I can say God is made of love.
Look at the ministry of Jesus. His time was spent primarily in teaching people about the Kingdom of God. His healing, weather stopping, and feeding miracles all came as a byproduct of his relationship with the people around Him, in connection with the fact that He loved them, and had the sovereign position of being able to pronounce people healed and forgiven.
It looks like this: (God’s Love + God’s Sovereignty) = Miracles
God’s Kingdom
God’s love and sovereignty divided amongst God’s Kingdom will, inevitably, wreak miracles. That is the nature of our relationship to God—with God—in God.
Now, this doesn’t deflate the importance or greatness of miracles. And, though it might take a few steps toward de-mystifying them (in some people’s minds), it certainly doesn’t have to. Look at what this means! We are part of the Kingdom, therefore, we are part of the everyday interaction of God with God’s creation, and therefore part of the working of miracles. God doesn’t just reach down and manipulate things every now and then, God’s doing it all the time! Miracles don’t have to be something we expect now and again, if we get the timing right, and God is listening, and can spare some time. Rather, they can be something we can expect, as things get harder, and we are drawn deeper and deeper in our relationship with Christ. The cogs of the kingdom working to make it right. God’s Snot coming to flush out the enemy’s pollen nodules in the nose of our lives.
It makes sense that a God who wants relationship, on a personal level, would be in that relationship. Right? All the time? So, therefore, it makes sense that, if all things are working together for the good of those found in the Kingdom of God, that God would be doing that work, right? But that isn’t the main point is it? Miracles are God’s Snot. They are the natural outgrowth of God’s love and work in our lives. God’s own awesome Snot. But we don’t worship the Snot. We worship the God.
I need a bigger hanky.
-
recommend
- recs 0
-
share
-
email
- sent 0
Post a Comment
- Back to Widows_and_Ravens's Xanga Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in Widows_and_Ravens's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (2)
And what of miracles vs. signs? Miracles (in the synoptics) are done for the benefit of the penitent. Signs, in John, are done for the benefit of Jesus -- they reveal who he is.
I think we need to be careful of having miracles (signs, what have you) just for the sake of having them. In the Gospels, they were always given in conjunction with the greater purpose that is the Kingdom of God. In Matthew, it's almost a proclamation of Jesus' coronation. In Mark, it's the power that is God over and against the powers that be (both physical and spiritual). In Luke, it's the fulfimment of the Isainic vision (see Luke 4). We've already touched upon John. In short, I don't think miracles happen just for the sake of someone feeling better (or whatever the apparent need of the moment may be). I think the larger question must be, "What furthers the Kingdom?" Oddly enough, death, and not healing, might be necessary for the Kingdom to come -- the cross proves it.
(Coincidentally, both miracles and signs caused problems. Jesus, by performing miracles and signs, was over-riding the curse of God upon particular individuals. Blessings and curses were the evidence of God's justice upon one's life. Jesus, in the eyes of some of his contemporaries, was working against God by undoing his decrees. Oddly enough, miracles and signs sometimes hindered faith.)
The Finger God sounds somewhat deistic. God is part of his own creation (the Incaranation teaches us this), so the snot theory hits closer to home I think.