Supernature, nature and theology; moving beyond binary dialectical arguments

In reading 1 Cornithians 12 and seeing the distinction made between “miracles and healings” as expressions of the church’s giftedness in the Holy Spirit, it brought about 2 questions:  1.  Why the distinction between miracles and healings?  2.  If a healing can be mechanistically explained by/through modern medicine and its interventions, is it any less a “healing or miracle”?  Regarding question 1, miracles seem to be an expression of God’s power in any way whereas a healing seems to be a subset of a miracle…God’s intervention with regard to one’s health with this special intervention as a unique reminder of God with and caring for us.  Regarding question 2,  the debate usually centers around a binary dialectic; supernature vs nature.  While both sides agree that it is important to understand what has happened in a “miraculous” event, they approach it’s understanding differently.  Supernature seeks information (from a revelational source) while nature seeks explanation (from a scientific source).  Within this context, explanation excludes miracle.  But if we were to look at “miracles” from a “trinary” (three way) perspective where nature is simply a middle ground (the here and now) of our human approach to understanding, empowered by supernature on the one side and informed by revelation on the other side then the explanation is complementary to the power and information behind the event.  In this latter situation the miracle is no less miraculous even when mechanistically explained.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s