Regarding Miracles.

REGARDING miracles, I do not accept impossibility, only the unexpected. There is an infinity of difference between something being impossible and something being irregular. For example, it may be that in another world somewhere some beings walk on water, or replicate food, or turn water into wine. I mean all of this without explanation, for as Sherlock Holmes says, ‘I begin to think, Watson, that I make a mistake in explaining. “Omne ignotum pro magnifico,” you know, and my poor little reputation, such as it is, will suffer shipwreck if I am so candid.’ Most societies on earth already achieve these things, but as they are achieved through described processes, and not instantaneous, they are not miracles; or rather, they are not considered miracles. Where it is normal in another world for the shadow of the sundial to move backwards it would be a miracle for it to move forwards.

   Of course, within the scheme of infinity it is also latently possible that charlatanism should occur. Those who intend to give a false impression of power by deceiving the fallible senses, or a too gullible reasoning, may of course do so. Equally, those people who recognise these designing persons for the cozeners they are need fear no charge of blasphemy, for there are flying as well as flightless birds. Miracle after all refers mostly to an emotion. Anything may happen, no man is endowed with the all-seeing power which should provide for him in declaring that certain things may not happen. Indeed, if any man had such a power, he himself would be the possible cause of the unusual (or miraculous) happening. Science itself must make provision for possibilities in the universe which would be entirely miraculous to our thoughts or feelings. As the statement ‘all sheep are white’ is destroyed by one black sheep only, so the certitudes of physics and chemistry can be broken, and probably are broken, by the untested regions we do not know. Even the same regions of space have had different circumstances at different times and would, therefore, provide wildly variant results to the same empirical experiments. This defeats a common argument of atheism, that scientific books contain better or more lasting truths than the Bible, because the Bible could never be written again whereas the science experiments could be performed again. The Bible, if it were lost, could be written again. Inspiration where it exists will manifest itself. Experiments on the other hand change by the day, and there never was a more revisionist practice than science.

   We are so alike in truth to the times of the early Christians, the cultists of Dionysus, the Druids, or even of Hesiod, that we are as willing to see a miracle as to credit it. Sometimes it so happens that I surround myself with all convenience of the times in which I live, with packaged food and drink, water sparkling like champagne, delicately quenching my thirst without intoxicating my senses, most palatable chocolate, excellent music, a comfortable bed, films to enjoy, games to play, a chair to sit in and books to read, a dog to keep company, and yet amid all this I can still have a headache, or feel nauseated, or irritated. At such a time I am no more accommodated than Diogenes in his barrel to feel better. Patience, the virtue to withstand the perceived elongation of time, is all: and all frayed. There are circumstances more overpowering and influential than any quantity of brandy, or food, or good company may allay. Upon such occasions we are willing that any sudden and startling change should occur, and perhaps the desire may sometimes contribute to the fulfilment of the miracle, as prophesy to its own realisation.  

   A madman sees signs in everything and nothing, a sane man does not see signs. Nay, all thought and language is comprised of signs, a sane man too sees signs in everything, but the right signs. What indeed are the right signs? The signs the majority are trained to see, not the signs they are not trained to see and which therefore, of course, do not really exist. Does any symbol exist? As an artistic depiction we say yes, as a notion we say yes, as an object we say no unless it be such an object as a cross, but the artistic depiction again fashioned from material. Physically no, we say they do not exist. There is no inch to be found in the world, no gallon, no minute, only an inch of something, a gallon's worth of liquid, a minute's worth of ticking. The sign is a measure only. Where is the original triangle, the true square, the absolute circle? In Plato's beautiful theory: somewhere, another dimension perhaps, or maybe our defective senses see only irregularity as a mite walking on the surface of Lo Sposalizio. The universe seems vast and bleak to us, but so must the human body seem to a blood cell.

   Doubt is so involved in our beings that we never can be certain of anything. When we tip our teacups to our mouths there is nothing which may prove absolutely that the tea’s fluid will not fall upwards instead of downwards. It would be unusual, and certainly inconvenient, but it needs only happen once to become possible. We may be glad generally that miracles do not occur, such things might be as troublesome as happy. If I miraculously woke up and saw people doffing their hats to me as they commuted to work through the firmament, like Mary Poppins, by means of their umbrellas, I would be disconcerted, and not necessarily convinced of theism. For I never have much understood the argument or proof of God by miracle. If Jesus Christ, whom I have no trouble in calling my saviour, did certainly resurrect Lazarus, still the waters, walk on them, make banquets of a few loaves and fishes, and cured by touch diseases, I might rejoice in the good these things did to people in those days, but what good do they confer on me? I might be as willing by this standard to believe that Jesus was a magician or a mythical being as that he was the Son of God. No, it is not His miracles but His words, His life, His philosophy, His character, which are to me a revelation. My faith is not founded on Daniel being preserved from the lions, it is founded on Daniel’s existence itself, on the existence of man. If Jesus can be so wonderful a being, then surely so must God be. There is the revelation of God in my eyes. The sermon on the mount is more miraculous, I mean in an expressive way, than the raising of Lazarus. The sermon on the mount has done more for humanity, in that it has done more to increase faith. Therefore on miracles I might remain neutral, as they are not important to me, unless the whole of existence be called a miracle. Then might I heartily partake of the general acclamation and joy.