Episode 56, I have some comments regarding this passage of Jesus healing the boy. First convulsions and a foaming mouth are classic signs of epilepsy. And Mathew 17:15 identifies the boy as epileptic, see supplementary quote 7 for this passage. Second, this account is typical of ancient medicine whereby demons and evil spirits caused diseases. This is another example of the agentic notion of causality. Third, I think the best way to approach this passage is to consider the principle of accommodation. As we've seen in this hermeneutical principle number three, Jesus uses ancient science in his teaching, such as the ancient botany that mustard seeds were the smallest of all seeds. Could it be that Jesus is accommodating and using ancient medicine here? Also see supplementary quotes 8 to 11 for other examples of Jesus and ancient medicine. Here are some questions I'd like you to think about regarding the ancient medicine in the Bible. Were ancient people capable to understand the neuro-pathological mechanisms of epilepsy? I don't think so, because we only started to understand the mechanism of this disease in the 20th century. But for ancient people, to believe a demon had entered the boy was quite reasonable, because if you've ever seen an epileptic seizure, it is terrifying. And we can appreciate why ancient people thought that something evil had entered the afflicted person. But here is a more significant and critical question. Were the ancient people who saw this episode with Jesus capable of knowing a miracle had happened with the epileptic boy? My answer is yes, because they would've seen that the boy stopped convulsing and never had another seizure. Or to restate this question, was it within their scope of understanding to know that a miracle had happened? Even though they did not understand the neuro-pathological mechanisms behind epilepsy. Again my answer is ye.s, recognizing that Jesus healed the boy was well within their capacity. We will further explore this topic in hermeneutical principle number eight, the scope of cognitive competence. To conclude this section, we can ask the question, is Egyptian and Mesopotamian science, science? The answer is both yes and no. Yes, these ancient people made very good observations, developed math and even could make correct predictions in the heavens. But, no their science was still steeped in an agentic causality with God and God's demons operating in nature. Again I would term it Ancient Science. Our final example of ancient science is Greek science, which first originates roughly between 500 and 300 BC, BC/E. This is often called the Greek Miracle, or the birth of philosophy. Most notably, the Greeks began to ask questions about the natural world. Its composition, what is it made of? The world's operation, how does it work? And the Greeks focused on natural causes, the gods were not in the explanations. For example with eclipses, they were not to be understood as supernatural omens, instead there was a natural cause. The sun was seen as a bowl of fire that turns away, as a result there was a decrease in divine interventionism in nature, and an increase in natural processes. It's important to note, some of the characteristics of this Greek science. First, it is not anti God, most believed in the gods, and their activity in nature. But, there was a definitive shift in divine action from interventionism to providentialism. However, by asking questions about the physical world, it led to fewer functions for the gods in nature. And the gods became redundant, and even disposable. This is the beginning of a significant historical trend known as the De-Sacralization or De-Deification of nature, in which there is the elimination of God and divine action. And this is clear evidence that science impacts religion. It is also worth pointing out that the Greeks did produce the Atomists who were the 1st Dysteleologists. They believe that there was no mind and no divinity in the world, and that the world was nothing but atoms in random motion. End of episode.