Miracles

В монографии представлены несколько смысловых блоков, связанных с восприятием и интерпретацией человеком исторического бытия. Ранние греческие мыслители пытались получить доступ к исходникам (началам) бытия, и эти интенции легли в основу научного знания, а также привели к появлению метафизики. В классической (и в неклассической) метафизике за основу была принята догма Пифагора и Платона о неизменности подлинной реальности, из чего следовало отрицание бытийного характера времени. Автор монографии отказывается от этой догмы и предлагает стратегию обновления метафизики и перехода ее к новому — постнеклассическому (...) — этапу. Поскольку трансформационный потенциал реальности наиболее явно представлен в историческом становлении, авторская стратегия реализуется в метафизике истории. При этом выявляются начала истории, в каком качестве выступают «дух», «культурно-историческая матрица» и «метафизический проект организации бытия» («онтологический проект»). Исследуются формы и механизмы «работы» человека с прошлым, обсуждаются вопросы, связанные с постижением логики исторического процесса, а также с ролью (творческой) личности в истории. Анализируются причины цивилизационных кризисов и очерчиваются возможные пути их разрешения, предлагается метафизическая интерпретация социальных и военных конфликтов. Завершает исследование рассмотрение трансформации человеческого естества под влиянием информационных, био- и нанотехнологий. (shrink)

This paper continues as the second part of my study of the relationship of Fr. Lawrence Dewan OP and Etienne Gilson. My first paper explored their metaphysical differences, while this second paper explores their common commitment to Christian philosophy and to St. Thomas Aquinas’ seminal work on the interrelationship of faith and reason as manifest most clearly in the interrelationship of revealed theology and philosophy. This leads us into a closer examination of Gilson's sustained treatment of this topic. However, we (...) must acknowledge that this topic is often susceptible to unproductive philosophical and metaphysical abstraction. In order to avoid this, we depart from the standard method of treatment through an interdisciplinary appeal to the theological, philosophical, and historical implications of the bodily resurrection of Christ. (shrink)

Une première partie se donne pour tâche de faire apparaître que, loin de tout miser sur le caractère extra-ordinaire et merveilleux des « miracles » de Jésus, les récits évangéliques frappent plutôt par la « réserve » et la « discrétion » avec lesquelles ils rapportent ces actions étonnantes.Il est alors en un second temps possible, en référence à la Résurrection du même Jésus, de préciser non seulement en quoi lesdits miracles peuvent être tenus pour révélateurs de Dieu, mais plus (...) globalement ce qu’ils sont susceptibles d’éclairer concernant l’œuvre de Dieu en général.The first part endeavours to show that – far from placing all stakes on the extra-ordinary and marvelous character of Jesus’ ‘miracles’ – the gospel tales are striking in the ‘reticence’ and ‘discretion’ with which they report these surprising acts.This leads to a second possible approach, referring to the Resurrection of that same Jesus, by elucidating not only in which sense those miracles can be held to reveal God, but more globally what they can reveal about the works of God in general. (shrink)

Ainsi que le soulignait H. Duméry, le miracle ne doit pas lâcher la « topique théologique»s’il ne veut pas«s’égarer sur un terrain de fausse science ». Le genre « évangile » intègre certes la thaumaturgie, mais il intègre aussi son motif correcteur et son « thème compensateur », dont le « croire sans voir » « agit comme réducteur de toute adhésion sur preuves, de toute foi sur constats ». Meier semble négliger cette contre-épreuve, pourtant instructive et probablement décisive quant (...) à l’élucidation de l’identité du Messie et du prophète eschatologique Jésus.La mise en exergue d’une « tradition des miracles » donne aussi parfois l’impression que la confession de foi est secondarisée, comme si le motif pascal interférait telle une composante susceptible d’être détachée du récit au profit de l’acte de guérison qui vérifie et confirme le résultat, associant l’historicité bien établie de la tradition des miracles et la christologie sui generis qui en découle. Or, le miracle ne peut être isolé comme acte de puissance et de transgression laissé à la discrétion du pouvoir divin. Christologie et thaumaturgie ne se laissent point séparer. Ainsi, l’une, c’est-à-dire la seconde, se laisse reconduire à son principe critique immédiat, la personne de Jésus qui en assume la charge de manière unique.As H. Duméry emphasized, miracle must not depart from the ‘theological topic’ if it does not want to ‘stray into the terrain of a false science’. The ‘gospel’ genre certainly integrates thaumaturgy, but it also includes its correcting scheme and its ‘compensating theme’, the ‘believing without seeing’ which ‘acts as a reducer of any adhesion due to proof, of all faith based on simple observation’. Meier seems to neglect this counter-proof, which is nonetheless instructive and probably decisive for elucidating the identity of the Messiah and the eschatological prophet Jesus.Highlighting the ‘miracle tradition’ also at times gives the impression that the confession of faith is secondarized, as if the Pascal theme were interfering as a component that could be detached from the narrative in favor of the healing act which lends truth and confirms the result, associating the well established historicity of miracle tradition and the Christology sui generis which flows from it. However, miracle cannot be isolated as an act of power and transgression left to the discretion of the divine. Christology and thaumatury are in no way separable. Thus, the second can be reduced to its immediate critical principle, the person of Jesus who assumes this function in a unique way. (shrink)

Review of David and Randall Basinger's "Philosophy and Miracle," in which they discuss the definition of miracle, the possibility of miracles, recognition of miracles, and the role of miracles in the problem of evil.

I argue that, while Hume’s approach to Newton is sometimes critical and sometimes not, Hume’s position with regard to newtonian method is coherent overall. Rather than speaking of two Humes, from an humean perspective we should rather speak of two Newtons: the positivist and the theologian.

Following a brief examination of some remarks by Paul Ricoeur on the notion of testimony. I provide the outline or an analysis of revelation based upon certain key concepts of process philosophy. This is followed by a more specific interpretation within the context of Whitehead’s philosophy of process.

Locke considers miracles to be crucial in establishing the credibility and reasonableness of Christian faith and revelation. The performance of miracles, he argues, is vital in establishing the "credit of the proposer" who makes any claim to providing a divine revelation. He accords reason a pivotal role in distinguishing spurious from genuine claims to divine revelation, including miracles. According to Locke, genuine miracles contain the hallmark of the divine such that pretend revelations become intuitively obvious. This paper argues that serious (...) tensions exist in Locke's position regarding miracles, which impact on the reasonableness of the assent to Christianity which he presumes they provide. (shrink)

Evan Fales has argued that divine causation is not possible. His central argument involves an analysis of causation that requires that there has to be a mapping feature to guarantee that the particular effect follows the particular cause. He suggests that being related in space and time will provide the means to map the right effects onto their causes. In this paper, I argue that the spatial relation between cause and effect is not necessary to the causal relation. In cases (...) of volition, it appears that the mapping of particular effects onto volitions is achieved by the intentional content of the volition. Therefore, spatial relations are not necessary to causation and the impossibility of divine causation has not been shown. (shrink)

How does God govern the world? For many theists “laws of nature” play a vital role. But what are these laws, metaphysically speaking? I shall argue that laws of nature are not external to the objects they govern, but instead should be thought of as reducible to internal features of properties. Recent work in metaphysics and philosophy of science has revived a dispositionalist conception of nature, according to which nature is not passive, but active and dynamic. Disposition theorists see particulars (...) as being internally powerful rather than being governed by external laws of nature, making external laws in effect ontologically otiose. I will argue that theists should prefer a dispositionalist ontology, since it leads them toward the theory of concurrentism in divine conservation, rather than occasionalism, and revives the distinction between internal and external teleology. God on this view does not govern the world through external laws of nature, but rather through internal aspects of powerful properties. (shrink)