June 13 2012

Some people, in their attempt to refute the possibility of miracles, must argue that they go against the laws of nature. They say that miracles by their very nature contradict the natural flow of events. However, in light of our understanding of God’s nature, that is not a necessary or even reasonable conclusion.

Being myself an artist I often see analogies in a painting. Studying one painting scientifically may allow one to draw up conclusions about regulations and patterns within the painting. However, those regulations and patterns are not such that the artist was or is confined to. To provide one possible specific example: suppose an artist used only three colors to create a certain painting. It would be ridiculous to reject all other colors simply on the basis of that fact. Though science certainly has its merits and proper uses, scientific study of a painting can provide nothing about the artistic intention of its creator, in relation to its purpose as a whole. Such an observer cannot judge an artist or his work scientifically.

How then can we as humans expect to confine God to our so called scientific “rules” that we have observed in His far more complex creation of nature. Such observances only tell us what God has done, not what he is capable of doing. One cannot with science compute values for what God should or shouldn’t do within his own masterpiece, because they have little if any understanding of His ultimate view and intentions, and of the purpose of His creation.

David Steltz

שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָה אֶחָֽד
וְאָ֣הַבְתָּ֔ אֵ֖ת יְהוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֑יךָ בְּכָל־לְבָבְךָ֥ וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁךָ֖ וּבְכָל־מְאֹדֶֽך
וְאָֽהַבְתָּ֥ לְרֵעֲךָ֖ כָּמ֑וֹךָ