 |
Miracles & the Supernatural |
 |
|
Miracles & the Supernatural |
|
In this chapter I felt it important to focus more closely upon one aspect of the relation of Science to religion within Baha’i theology that I only really touched on in the previous chapter. That issue concerns the Baha’i doctrinal stance(s) concerning how we must form our faith when faced with the concept of the supernaturally miraculous within the temporal realm.
Baha’i doctrine can be discovered to really assert two separate doctrinal takes on the idea of the literal supernatural within the temporal realm. One thread of teaching denies it outright on scientific/intellectual grounds, rooted in arguments based upon materialistic naturalism. The other line of doctrinal teaching simultaneously (contradictorily) accepts the fully supernatural completely.
There is yet another line of argument found within the Baha’i holy writings, (associated with the materialistic denial of the supernatural), that tries to bridge the gap by arguing that miracles are only “seemingly” supernatural, in the same way that photography or the telegraph, for instance, would “seem” miraculous to a primitive, pre-technological people. That line of thought really lines up with the anti supernatural materialistic stance since, although it concedes the “miraculous”, argues that such events are explained as really having materialistic explanations that just haven’t been as yet discovered.
We begin by looking at the assertions that supernaturalism in religion amounts to superstitious ignorance. These quotes were also cited in the previous chapter.
"We may think of science as one wing and religion as the other; a bird needs two wings for flight, one alone would be useless. Any religion that contradicts science or that is opposed to it, is only ignorance - for ignorance is the opposite of knowledge. ...That which is in conformity with science is also in conformity with religion'. Whatever the intelligence of man cannot understand, religion ought not to accept. Religion and science walk hand in hand, and any religion contrary to science is not the truth." (`Abdu'l-Baha: Paris Talks, pages 130-131)
"There is no contradiction between true religion and science. When a religion is opposed to science it becomes mere superstition: that which is contrary to knowledge is ignorance. How can a man believe to be a fact that which science has proved to be impossible? If he believes in spite of his reason, it is rather ignorant superstition than faith. The true principles of all religions are in conformity with the teachings of science." (`Abdu'l-Baha: Paris Talks, pages 141)
"Every religion which is not in accordance with established science is superstition. Religion must be reasonable. If it does not square with reason, it is superstition and without foundation. ... ... if religious belief, principle or creed is not in accordance with the intellect and the power of reason, it is surely superstition." (`Abdu'l-Baha: Promulgation of Universal Peace, pages 63-64)
"Any religious belief which is not conformable with scientific proof and investigation is superstition, for true science is reason and reality, and religion is essentially reality and pure reason; therefore, the two must correspond. Religious teaching which is at variance with science and reason is human invention and imagination unworthy of acceptance, for the antithesis and opposite of knowledge is superstition born of the ignorance of man. If we say religion is opposed to science, we lack knowledge of either true science or true religion, for both are founded upon the premises and conclusions of reason, and both must bear its test." (`Abdu'l-Baha: Promulgation of Universal Peace, page 107)
"The fourth principle of Baha'u'llah is the Unity of Religion and Science.
We may think of science as one wing and religion as the other; a bird needs two wings for flight, one alone would be useless. Any religion that contradicts science or that is opposed to it, is only ignorance - for ignorance is the opposite of knowledge.
...Whatever the intelligence of man cannot understand, religion ought not to accept. Religion and science walk hand in hand, and any religion contrary to science is not the truth."
(`Abdu'l-Baha: Paris Talks*, pages 130-131)
"Religion must stand the analysis of reason. It must agree with scientific fact and proof so that science will sanction religion and religion fortify science. Both are indissolubly welded and joined in reality. If statements and teachings of religion are found to be unreasonable and contrary to science, they are outcomes of superstition and imagination." (`Abdu'l-Baha: Promulgation of Universal Peace, pages 175-176)
"Furthermore, religion must conform to reason and be in accord with the conclusions of science. For religion, reason and science are realities; therefore, these three, being realities, must conform and be reconciled. A question or principle which is religious in its nature must be sanctioned by science. Science must declare it to be valid, and reason must confirm it in order that it may inspire confidence. If religious teaching, however, be at variance with science and reason, it is unquestionably superstition. ...How then can man rightfully accept any proposition which is not in conformity with the processes of reason and the principles of science?" (`Abdu'l-Baha: Promulgation of Universal Peace, page 394).
The above quotes use Science and human intellect as a litmus test dictating denial of literal belief in miracles as being truly supernatural events. Time and again such belief is relegated to ignorance and superstition on the basis of its incompatibility with Scientific knowledge and human intellectual understanding within the Laws of nature within the temporal realm of reality.
We can see a specific example of the application of this general doctrinal outlook in the Baha’i view of Jesus’ Resurrection as Abdul Baha explains in Some Answered Questions that,
"His (Jesus') resurrection from the interior of the earth is also symbolical... ...Therefore, we say that the meaning of Christ's resurrection
is as follows: the disciples were troubled and agitated after the martyrdom of Christ. The Reality of Christ, which signifies His teachings, His bounties, His perfections and His spiritual power, was hidden and concealed for two or three days after His martyrdom, and was not resplendent and manifest. ...The Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body; and when after three days the disciples became assured and steadfast, and began to serve the Cause of Christ...the Reality of Christ became resplendent ...; His religion found life... ...Such is the meaning of the resurrection of Christ, and this was a true resurrection. But as the clergy have neither understood the meaning of the Gospels nor comprehended the symbols..."
Abdul Baha, specifically, symbolizes the Resurrection away. And he does so with the rationale that it is impossible to take it literally since it is ignorant to accept belief in anything that is contrary to worldly wisdom (science). This symbolic redefining of the alleged miracle, so as to conform it to normal worldly acceptability and the materialistic foundation that defines “Science”, is also echoed by Shoghi Effendi,
"We do not believe that there was a bodily resurrection after the crucifixion of Christ, but that there was a time after His ascension when His disciples perceived spiritually His true greatness and realized He was eternal in being. This is what has been reported symbolically in the New Testament and been misunderstood. His eating with His disciples after resurrection is the same thing."
(Shoghi Effendi: High Endeavors, Pages: 69-70)
Here Shoghi Effendi lays to rest any doubts about his intent. According to his words here, there simply WAS NO supernaturally miraculous and personal "bodily Resurrection" of Jesus from the dead, and the alternative "meaning" given is PURELY symbolic. And he isn't just saying that such belief is "pointless" or "useless". He is saying it is NONEXISTENT.
So we find that the general and pervasive overall doctrinal teaching on principal against literal belief in supernaturalism within the temporal realm, finds voice in specific examples like Jesus’ Resurrection, redefined according to symbolism specifically on the grounds that literal belief in a supernatural event is ignorance and superstitious misunderstanding.
There is a subset of apologetic arguments in the Baha’i writings that, at first reading, seem to accept the miraculous. But careful analysis of what is actually being said, reveals that these kinds of explanations are really variant ways of denying the supernatural in deference to the Scientific/intellectual standard of materialism just defined by the above quotes. Consider how Abdul Baha treats the miracle of the virgin birth, which is a specific example of a “miracle” that can be seen to be asserted as not really being a supernatural event. Abdul Baha on pgs 87, 88 of Some Answered Questions relates the virgin birth to the level of a “seeming miracle” when he says,
“Briefly, they (materialists) say a man without a human father cannot be imagined. In answer, the theologians say: "This thing is not impossible and unachievable, but it has not been seen; and there is a great difference between a thing which is impossible and one which is unknown. For example, in former times the telegraph, which causes the East and the West to communicate, was unknown but not impossible; photography and phonography were unknown but not impossible."
Abdul Baha appeals to the worldly level of conformity in meaning when addressing the virgin birth. He uses the analogy of the telegraph to pre-technological people who would mistakenly THINK it "miraculous" (supernatural) indeed. This rationalized way of redefining the term “miracle” as merely one of misperception of otherwise strictly natural events, relegates this kind of explanation to the camp of Baha’i anti-supernaturalism as defined above.
Of course, the virgin birth of a human child absent any human sperm is not a "seeming" miracle like a telegraph. And modern technological advancement only deepens the confirmation that a Jewish peasant girl 2000 years ago in the Middle East could not, in ANY scientific understanding that could ever be uncovered, spontaneously generate a genetically complete viable male fetus independent of and even absent the human male fertilization of a human egg, much less a father's chromosomes needed to allow the possibility of a male gendered child.
Still, the argument that miracles only “seem” supernatural is a distinct type of Baha’i doctrinal assertion that denies literal belief in the the genuinely supernatural within the temporal realm.
Now we will move on to the other side of the internal doctrinal contradiction that exists within the Baha’i doctrinal structure of teachings on the concept of the supernaturally miraculous. At this point we have discovered a very clear and specific apologetic stance against literal belief in the genuinely supernatural. This, we saw, was a line of doctrinal teaching argued so by general principal of non conformity to Science and man’s intellectual ability, and by way of application of that general standard in specific examples. We consider next the following set of quotes that actually present pro-supernatural arguments for absolute literal belief in transcendent, supernatural interpretation of miracles as being most reasonable and wise. Again we will look at the general principal first, and then a specific example as applied.
Abdul Baha in Some Answered Questions tells us that,
“The Holy Manifestations are the sources of miracles and the originatorsof wonderful signs. For Them, any difficult and impracticable thing is possible and easy. For through a supernatural power wonders appear from Them; and by this power, which is beyond nature, They influence the world of nature. From all the Manifestations marvelous things have appeared. But in the Holy Books an especial terminology is employed, and for the Manifestations these miracles and wonderful signs have no importance. They do not even wish to mention them. For if we consider miracles a great proof, they are still only proofs and arguments for those who are present when they are performed, and not for those who are absent."
Notice that these "wonders" are NOT just "apparently" supernatural (as in events for which there is a naturalistic explanation but we just haven't discovered it yet), but they are said to be distinctly "beyond nature", FULLY supernatural.
Shoghi Effendi explains that,
"... miracles are always possible, even though they do not constitute a regular channel whereby God reveals His power to mankind. To reject miracles on the ground that they imply a breach in the laws of nature is a very shallow, well nigh stupid argument, inasmuch as God Who is the Author of the Universe can...bring any change, no matter how temporary, in the operation of the laws which He Himself has created." (Lights of Guidance #1638).
Again, this is not the assertion of a “seeming” supernatural miracle with an as yet undiscovered materialistic explanation. It is a specific argument that supernaturalism is, in fact, a “channel whereby reveals His power to mankind”, in events that specifically “change” the natural basis of “laws which He Himself has created”.
If we move to the specific application of this line of teaching so opposite the former one we considered, we find that there are arguments asserting the virgin birth of Jesus, not as a seeming miracle that has an undiscovered materialistic explanation, but as a fully and literally supernatural event. Shoghi Effendi, in addressing the virgin birth of Jesus said that,
'On this point (Jesus' virgin birth), as on several others, the Baha'i Teachings are in full agreement with the doctrines of the Catholic Church.' (Lights of Guidance, 490-491).
He further stated: 'In this matter we are in entire agreement with the most orthodox church views.' (High Endeavors, 70)."
Now observe in what Shoghi Effendi says, that the event of the virgin birth of Jesus is not in this case said to be just a “seeming” miracle, still in keeping with Science and materialistic intellectual reason, like a telegraph would seem to a pre-technological people. It is now said to be a fully supernatural transcendent event in exact keeping with the traditional Christian position. Of course the Catholic Church holds an absolutely literal and fully supernatural belief in the virgin birth of Jesus. As is stated clearly in the official Roman Catholic Catechism which defines not only today's Roman Catholic understanding of the virgin birth, but that contemporary with Shoghi Effendi's concession as well;
"496 From the first formulations of her faith, the Church has confessed that Jesus was conceived solely by the power of the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin Mary, affirming also the corporeal aspect of this event: Jesus was conceived "by the Holy Spirit without human seed".146 The Fathers see in the virginal conception the sign that it truly was the Son of God who came in a humanity like our own....497 The Gospel accounts understand the virginal conception of Jesus as a divine work that surpasses all human understanding and possibility"
Notice that the Catholic position asserts the event, not as a "seeming" miracle that might really be naturalistic in its dynamic though undiscovered. It says specifically that the event, "surpasses all human understanding and possibility". It is asserted to be a fully, literally and totally supernatural miracle.
From a letter dated December 31, 1937 written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer Shoghi Effendi states:
"First regarding the birth of Jesus Christ. In light of what Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha have stated concerning this subject it is evident that Jesus came into this world through the direct intervention of the Holy Spirit, and that consequently His birth was quite miraculous. This is an established fact, and the friends need not feel at all surprised, as the belief in the possibility of miracles has never been rejected in the Teachings. Their importance, however, has been minimized."
This quote is fully self explanatory in asserting a literal-supernatural event. Notice that the ONLY qualification here is that the "importance" of miracles "has been minimized". The FACT of them as truly supernatural events is flatly accepted, as is. This quote then, by definition,asserts the virgin birth as being a genuinely transcendent event, counter to the laws of science and human intellect within the temporal universe.
I think it is important and revealing to notice here that the doctrinal thread of teaching within Baha’i theology that accepts the literal supernaturally miraculous within the temporal world, accepts it pervasively, both in direct acts of God from heaven as a “channel” he uses to reveal his power, (the virgin birth as an example), and the supernatural acts of human manifestations from within the temporal world which Abdul Baha claims they can and do perform with ease.
The fundamental contradiction then, is that, on the one hand, the assertion is made repeatedly that true religion cannot accept ANYTHING that science and man's understanding can't grasp. The rationale is that such literal belief in what are gauged according to man's intellect and science to be impossibilities, is superstitious ignorance and, specifically, "not the truth". Understand that the real argument here is NOT that belief in supernatural miracles may be possible, but that they are "unimportant" in terms of their miraculaous supernaturalism. The argument here is that such belief is absolutely wrong and ignorant, and amounts to superstition that is specifically, "not the truth."
Yet, the assertion is elsewhere made that manifestations can and do perform literal supernatural miracles that are specifically "beyond nature" within the temporal realm, and that the genuinely supernatural, miraculous is in no way ruled out by Baha'i theology. This other side, of course, would assume that true religion DOES need to incorporate some level of belief in the literal supernatural, specifically "beyond nature", within the historic world, such that events truly and genuinely beyond Man's understanding and the Laws of Nature (Scientific knowledge) can and do actually happen, and manifestations perform them with ease. Or, that God actually does directly impinge upon the material world supernaturally as a genuine means of working His purpose in the World (virgin birth of Jesus).
The associated quotes are relevant, objective in their assertions, and definitive of a fundamental doctrinal contradiction concerning a basic theological presupposition; whether or not religious belief should or should not adhere to ANY literal supernaturalism in the temporal world.
Within Baha'i theology there is a line of thought, clearly expressed, that weds religion with man's intellectual and scientific ability and understanding in such a way as to flatly reject any supernaturalism as superstition and ignorance. That represents a fundamental rule of discernment, or general standard of religious acceptability for belief, that cannot cross the boundary of human understanding or scientific knowledge, without becoming something that "religion ought not accept". It forms an underlying basic presupposition that must thereafter apply to all religious considerations.
Yet, there is also a thread of teaching that generally assumes the fully supernatural with abandon, and applies that general principle to numerous specific examples wherein Baha'i theology objectively contradicts its own other anti supernatural standard. Manifestations work wonders that are distinctly said to be "beyond nature", and the virgin birth is formally wed to Catholic Doctrine which fully concedes the event as supernatural in the sense of being both beyond human understanding and human possibility. Now religion in the temporal world is filled with the supernatural!
The point is that a formal, underlying, and basic standard of religious discernment is both established, and broken, within the same doctrinal system. Such is the fruit of man made religion.