I recently finished a book called “They Flew: A History of the Impossible,” by Carlos Eire. It is a fascinating book about miracle-workers before, during, and after the Protestant Reformation. Eire points out that Catholics and Protestants often agreed that something supernatural (or preternatural) was happening, but the origin or power behind the event was debated.
For example, let’s say a man took off in flight while praying. Some Catholics would claim that this man was holy and God was giving him an ecstatic experience of the divine. (This group of fans might call him a saint before he died and before a rigorous investigation by the Inquisition.) The Protestants, on the other hand, would claim that the devil was behind this trick, and the illusion tricked many simple-minded folk.
Very few people said, “Yeah, he’s not flying.” They weren’t treating it the way that modern folks treat a magic show. It was not entertainment with a hidden explanation. They had two violently opposed reactions: awe or horror. You’d be surprised how many Catholics were suspicious of these “miracles” (hence the Inquisitors) and how many Protestants would admit it was something beyond human sleight of hand.
However, if a secular American time-traveled and told them, “But the devil doesn’t exist and people don’t fly,” Catholics and Protestants alike would have responded with pity, confusion, or outrage. Flippant hand-waving would be treated as the ignorant response.
This book made me think about a diagnostic test, a way to determine how open you are to the supernatural. I don’t mean existentially open to demons or angels, miracles or God. I’m wondering what people think is already out there. In other words, what are you convinced of right now whether or not you have had any supernatural experience.
This test is open to the religious and the irreligious, but the further you go, the more likely you are to be spiritual/spooky/Christian. But it’s not a list of “stages,” or a list that demonstrates “enlightenment” or “progress.” I guess the best way to put it is that - as you make your way down the list from #1 to #10 - you are accepting more than what you can verify empirically.
In other words, this is my attempt to create a non-pejorative diagnostic tool to see how much “spooky-ness” you accept. I have my own take, so I’m not neutral. I think Christians should not be atheists or pantheists, for example. But the differences are important for pastoral concerns in the church today.
Atheism. There is only the universe (or the multiverse). There is nothing beyond space and time. No God, no souls, no angels. Everything we can see with a telescope or a microscope is all there is. If there is another universe, there still is nothing spiritual or theistic in that universe. No spookiness, period.
Pantheism. God is the universe and the universe is God. “God” is a good word we should use (unlike the atheists) because it describes the universe in its totality. We are not divisible, isolated beings. We all make up one being and we should call that being God. It’s all very vague, but there is more to this cosmos than meets the eye.
Deism. There is a God who is independent of the universe. That God is the creator of this universe, but God is disconnected from, apathetic about, and not hands-on involved in this universe. There is one item in your “spooky” list but He is not a cause for concern here. He or It is not that interested in us.
Paganism. There are many gods, one of which may be more powerful than the rest. They are like bigger, powerful versions of us. They may care about us; they may hate us. Keep them happy with sacrifices. We have a bunch of stories about them, but it’s not all that important what they do in their realm. Let’s hope they stay there and don’t mess with us. Spookiness includes sacrifice, temples, incense - all in service of keeping gods and goddesses happy and far from us.
Classical Theism. God is the creator and sustainer of the universe, the ground of all being, who is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. It is not even possible for God to be “uninvolved” in this universe because if He were, the universe would cease to exist. Jews, Christians, and Muslims have this view of God and He is up to something in this world. He has plans whether you like them or not.
Spiritism. We are not the only intelligent creatures in heaven, hell, or earth. There are angels, archangels, seraphim, cherubim, ghosts, jinn, and/or demons. They are out there and at work in our midst. Typically, the angels are doing the Lord’s work and the demons want ill for us. Spiritual begins can reveal a message from God (great!) or possess you (not-great). They don’t have bodies but they do have minds. Typically, they are stronger than us. Obey angels and avoid demons. We are now in the realm of spooky creatures, beyond the physical realm.
Miracles happened in the past. Most Jews and Christians occupy this space. The creator God (with or without mediating agents) accomplished something that cannot be sufficiently explained by natural causes. Think of the Exodus or Christ’s resurrection. These events happened as much as the assassinations of MLK or JFK happened. (These folks can go further than #7, but some stop here and say that miracles ceased at some point in the past. Some say miracles ended with the canonization of Scripture or the death of the apostles.) Now we are talking about spooky events in history with real time stamps.
Isolated miracles today - Suppose you have a friend who goes to the doctor and finds out she has inoperable cancer. What does your church do? They pray for healing despite the fact that physicians say she has three months to live. The elders believe God can answer prayer, so they intercede on her behalf. If she goes back to the doctor and her cancer is gone, you might say, “It was a miracle. The doctors couldn’t explain what happened.” You have now moved on from #7, but you don’t have to proceed to #9.
Miracle-workers roam the earth today. You know how Paul got annoyed by a demon-possessed girl and performed an exorcism on the spot? Christians still do that kind of thing today. The Holy Spirit wills to give charismatic gifts to some individuals. Folks at #9 are not content to isolate miracles to events. Now miracles are almost congested or suffused into particular individuals. Believing in #9 does not mean you accept all claims to miracles, just that there are people with the Holy Spirit operating in a particularly powerful way. We are now officially in Catholic, Orthodox, and Pentecostal territory. Quite spooky indeed.
Miracles that aren’t in the Bible can happen today. Suppose someone claims to speak in tongues. For charismatics and Pentecostals, that’s not an issue. Suppose someone claims to bilocate - that is, appear in two places at the same time. Or have wounds appear in their hands like Jesus. Or survive only by eating the Eucharist. You have now officially entered the spookiest territory. This idea means that the Bible does not exhaustively name or show all of the miracles the Lord has up His sleeves. Indeed, people in camp #10 believe God has been coming up with new signs and wonders not seen in the pages of Scripture.
Why does this question matter for the Church today?
First, because Christians and non-Christians range from #1 to #10. When we read stories about spooky stuff in Scripture, we have real people in the room who are starting with no faith in God whatsoever, a vague new-age-y pantheism, or dabbled in the occult. We will have folks who came from pagan backgrounds. Our culture is just strange enough to have representatives from every camp. It would be good to know that information going into our sermons and classes.
Second, because younger generations are sometimes coming to us after dabbling in the occult. There are more and more young people who are dipping their toes in dark spiritual waters and they are finding something. They aren’t all hardened atheists like Christopher Hitchens or Sam Harris. They are meeting demons and running for their lives. Satan is not weak, it turns out.
This is why I found Eire’s book fascinating. Five centuries ago, Catholics and most Protestants agreed: the devil and his demons exist. They can at least deceive us with their power. And anyone dabbling in demonic darkness is putting their own souls in jeopardy. Not to mention bringing their loved ones in close proximity to that darkness.
What will our response be when folks who have encountered real Darkness come knocking on the doors of the church? Will we say, “That’s all stuff from the Middle Ages”? First, that would be wrong historically because most Protestants after the Reformation did not deny the devil’s power. Even though they saw these events as tricks, they were still Satan’s tricks!
Second, we will give these folks a good reason to go elsewhere. If a church cannot accept #8 (or #9 or #10), what good can it do for someone in the devil’s grip? If a lost soul needs a miracle, freedom from a demon, or prayers for victory in spiritual battles, it would be ironic that a church would say “that’s not what we do around here.”
I don’t think what I’m saying requires joining one particular church, either. The past century has seen an opening in many denominations to what I describe in #8. My experience is that many people in the pews already believe #8 whether their leaders know it or not. The pastoral moment is on the side of spooky Christians.
I suppose someone could say, like some 16th century Protestants, “But the Bible teaches #7, and anybody who believes 8-10 are wrong.” I would respond with a rather lengthy question: why would Jesus, the miracle-worker and exorcist, do the things He did for three years only to promise through the Bible that His church (which He knew would last for at least twenty centuries) would never do the things He did?1 Does that strike you as odd? It sounds like Jesus would be saying, “What I did for them I will not do for you.”
In John 14:12, Jesus seems to promise the opposite. “Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father."