I came across some interesting quotes about miracles in a book about the Enlightenment. Diderot wrote that he would not believe the report of a resurrection even if all of Paris were testifying to it. Similarly, Hume said that he would deny the resurrection of Queen Elizabeth against the testimony of all the historians of England. Both Diderot and Hume began with an a priori belief that miracles were impossible. I compare this to one of the famous sayings of Sherlock Holmes, “When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” I can imagine one of the philosophes of the Enlightenment saying something like this. An actual resurrection is impossible scientifically so the search is on to find the improbable event that fooled all those people.
« Gilead: A Review | Home | Plundering the Pagans »
Comments
This is an interesting post to me, mainly because I enjoy Sherlock Holmes. But keeping to the topic, the need to "see" or observe something (empiricism) to believe is all too common. Even Thomas said as much, didn't he? In response to the other disciples' exclamation, "We have seen the Lord," Thomas replies (much like Diderot and Hume?), "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe" (John 20:25).
And often, when men do see something miraculous (supernatural), even then they will not believe. When Christ point blank healed the man with a withered hand, what was the reaction of the Pharisees? Then the Pharisees went out and plotted against Him, how they might destroy Him (Matt. 12:14).
I'm trying to think of the reason people do this. Maybe this opens up discussion though. On a lighter note, I will say that my favorite quote of Sherlock Holmes (though perhaps contrary to my views!) is this: "To the logician all things should be seen exactly as they are, and to underestimate one's self is as much a departure from truth as to exaggerate one's own powers." Good post, CJ!
Posted by: David on Saturday, September 9, 2006
Thanks for the comment, David. Have you read any of Doyle's Professor Challenger books? Shannon really enjoys those. I think she lent Tara our collection.
I wonder how a conversation between a post-modern person and Holmes would go? The pomo individual would probably say that Holmes is exaggerating his own powers by claiming to see things exactly as they are. This is sort of a random comment...
Posted by: CJ Costello on Saturday, September 9, 2006
Hey, I gave 'em back!
Just don't read all the spiritualism stuff. Everything before that was fun.
Posted by: Tara on Saturday, September 9, 2006
Tara did give it back but it was checked out again...I am reading it to my students at school.
Posted by: Shannon on Sunday, September 10, 2006
Now that I think about it, Colleen had it in between Tara and me.
Like CJ said, I think it's a really good book.
Posted by: Shannon on Monday, September 11, 2006