BettyG Wrote:Nature is not a "closed system," and miracles are not "intrusions" in to an "established order." In the last fifty years we have been staggered too often by discoveries which at one time were pronounced impossible. ... This change of thought does not, of course, accredit the miraculous; but it does mean that, given the right conditions, miracles are not impossible; no scientific or philosophic dogma stand in the way.
Two different ideas are being meshed into one here. Something previously thought to be impossible isn't and wasn't ever a miracle if it can now be explained; the reason being that, presumably, such an explanation means that we are capable of repeating the event. This is not what a miracle is, which is a one-off and uncommon event.
A miracle could be that a scientist watched lead turn into gold. This could be thought of as impossible and implausible, and hence a miracle, but if an explanation is found, then this "miracle" can be repeated as many times as you like, and then it's like anything else in our everyday lives -- it's not a miracle.
The moral of the story here is that this book is twisting the framework of science in such as way as to create a back door for miracles to enter the realm of science. I don't think so pal!
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle
