Miracles

All three of today's readings had some kind of miracle in them. In the gospel (John 6.1-21) the miracle is easy to spot, as Jesus feeds five thousand people with a few loaves of bread and some fish; Elijah does something similar in the Old Testament reading (2 Kings 4.42-44); the challenge is to find the miracle in the New Testament reading (Ephesians 3.14-21).

So, anyone interested can go scurrying to their Bible and see if they come up with the same answer as me.  Meanwhile, I have a question for you: do you think that miracles still happen today?
 
For some people, miracles are something that did happen, when Jesus was walking amongst us, but don't anymore; for others there's still room for miracles in some way; and for yet others, miracles never happened.
    Now we have science to explain so many things, so we can look more sceptically at everything Jesus did.  He didn't cast out demons, he just relieved the symptoms of people's depression or their mental illness.  He didn't heal the blind or the lame, he helped them overcome their psychosomatic disorders. He didn't multiply the loaves and fishes to make enough for everyone, he just encouraged people to share.
    Yet, while there are people who dismiss Biblical miracles, there are many of us who are comfortable with modern day miracles taking place. As an example here are some recent newspaper headlines.

From Doncaster Today (24/7/15): "Miracle no-one died after car smashed into Doncaster shop."
From The Mirror (22/7/15): "Alzheimers' miracle drug has saved my life. Trial Brit's joy as dementia slowed by new cure."
From the Boston Standard (23/7/15) "Dad hits out at health chief Jeremy Hunt and backs NHS miracle workers."
    That last story was about baby JJ who was born 16 weeks early weighing just 1lb 9oz; with problems with his stomach, an e coli infection, septicaemia and hypercholemia, it was a miracle that he survived.

Most people are comfortable with the idea of medical miracles as the result of good care and expert help, but how do these compare with the Biblical miracles?
    Well, first of all, let's consider what a miracle actually is...

It comes from the Latin word (don't they all..?) miraculum which means something to be wondered at, something wonderful.
    "Nobody died when that car crashed into the shop in Doncaster? It's a wonder."
    It's a miracle.

Things that are beyond our understanding are still miraculous, things that are new to us, things that we can't explain.
    But as soon as we can explain them, they cease to be miraculous.
    Take magic tricks as an example: kids love all magic tricks, even rubbish ones; most adults love the spectacular tricks, at least until they know how they're done. Then, when we do know how they're done, the wonder is gone.

I remember the first time I heard the Queen of the Night aria from Mozart's opera the Magic Flute. I was stunned by the voice of the singer; I had shivers and the hair on the back of my neck stood on end.

    Now when I hear it, I'm still impressed, but I'm not stopped in my tracks because I'm so used to it. For me, that miracle has lost its power.
    But it is still a miracle: there are many people who haven't heard it yet, who will find it wonderful when they do. No matter how I feel it still takes phenomenal ability and breath control.

Now, magic tricks are never really miracles: the miracle is getting people to believe that magic is real, and a bad magician never does that and never gives us something to be wondered at. But a great magician, like a great opera singer or a great medical professional is a miracle worker, in their own way.

So, Jesus the miracle worker: did he feed all those people that day? Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.
    I prefer to believe he did because he's God so, why not?
    But even if he didn't, something miraculous happened that day.

His arrival wasn't planned.  There was no schedule, he would just turn up, and because he was becoming very well known, people wanted to see the 'signs' he was performing.  When they heard Jesus was nearby, did they stop to bake bread and pack a lunch? Probably not.
    And then Jesus would preach for hours, and the people would stay and listen to him, for hours (that's a miracle in my book, when I get people yawning and checking their watches after ten minutes).
    Some of them might've had food with them already, like the little boy, but we have to remember there was 5,000 men, plus women and children. We're probably talking nearer 20 or 25,000 people.
    About the same number we have here in Workington.

Workington, where there are people who every day have food to spare, and others who have to rely on food banks to survive. Could we get the people of Workington to share out everything equally, so that no-one had too much and no-one too little?
    If we could, why haven't we managed it already? Why are there people throwing waste food in the bin just yards from people who are close to starving?

If the people of Israel in Biblical times are anything like the people of the world today, then Jesus getting everyone to share their food is a miracle, almost as much as multiplying the food he had to satisfy everyone.

Perhaps we've heard the story so often that, like the Queen of the Night, the miracle has lost its power over us, but that doesn't stop it from being a miracle.

So, right back at the beginning I asked what miracle was in Eph 3.14-21.
    It was a trick question, because there are actually two.
    Two miraculum, two things to be wondered at.

"How wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ."

and 

"He may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being."

Jesus loves you and the Spirit empowers you; what greater miracle is there than that?

Herod's vow

If you think about it, Mark 6:14-29 is unusual. The gospels are almost entirely about Jesus, what he did, what he said, but here's a passage that doesn't have him doing or saying anything.  He has sent the disciples out to minister in pairs, and then we shift our attention to Herod and John the Baptist.
    I like to imagine that Jesus took a bit of time off, put his feet up, had a well-earned rest. After all, everyone deserves a rest.

Sniffing butts is exhausting

Even though Jesus isn't directly involved in the story, it's still about him in a way: we see a foreshadowing of what's to happen to Jesus in the report of what happened to his cousin John.
    John is arrested, even though he was innocent; Jesus will be arrested, even though he is innocent. The person with the power to have John killed (Herod) doesn't want to do it; the person who will have the power to execute Jesus (Pilate) won't want to do it.  But Herod's hand is forced by the intrigues of Herodias; just as Pilate's hand will be forced by the intrigues of the Jewish leaders.
    That said, this is still a story about Herod, and it's Herod's actions that I want to look at.
    Essentially, Herod does a very, very silly thing and makes a promise that he can't possibly keep.

To understand the problem, we need to know that although he calls himself King Herod, he really isn't.  His father, Herod the Great, was a king, but the kingdom then gets split into four 'tetrarchies' each ruled over by a member of Herod the Great's family. So this Herod is in charge of only one quarter of the original kingdom, and even then his 'rule' can only carry on as long as the Roman authorities let it.  They are the real power in the region.
    This makes it all the more amazing when we hear Herod offer "up to half my kingdom". Did he mean up to half the tetrarchy? Or was he just talking a load of hot air?
    Either way, the whole thing blows up in his face when Herodias demands the head of John the Baptist.
    It leaves me wondering though, what if she had asked for half the kingdom instead? Would they have argued the difference between a kingdom and a tetrarchy? Would Herod have been willing to share in any case?
    In a way, Herod was probably lucky that all he was asked to do was murder an innocent man and produce his head as some kind of sick trophy.

    Let's consider what his options would have been:

• He could've tried to deny that he made any such offer, but he promised Herodias in front of his guests, so he would have looked pretty stupid trying to deny it.
• He could've admitted that he made the promise but then fail to deliver.  A previous king of Israel did that - Saul (1 Sa 14:36-46). Saul should have sacrificed his son after amking an oath to God, but the people begged him not to, and so he didn't.  It's worth remembering that Saul was not a very good king, and he wasn't very honourable either.
• He could go ahead and do what he promised, much like one of Israel's judges - Jephthah the Gileadite (Jg 11.29-40). Jephthah was honourable, but he ended up having to make a burnt sacrifice of his daughter.

My feeling is that Herod should never have made any kind of vow in the first place, but it was his birthday, and there was feasting, and I think we all know what that means...

Chess: the drinking game of kings

If there's a lesson for us to learn -- don't make promises, especially when there's been 'feasting'