A Significant Miraculous Event

Robert A. Herrmann

If you have read my testimony, I must stress that it doesn't truly indicate how very difficult it was for me to accept God although I did so in the appropriate Scriptural manner. I was an individual among many, many others who had successfully argued against an active supernatural God, against intelligent design, against all the many things I was now trying to accept. I doubt seriously that if I had not had an actual physical manifestation of God's love on April 7, 1977 that I would have taken the path towards further understanding. In the beginning, it was a very difficult path for me to follow and I was spiritually attacked over and over again for almost six years prior to the event I now describe. What I'm about to describe in detail indicates, to me, that God presents evidence in a special manner that is often only relevant to an individual's own personal circumstances, training and modes of observation.

Relative to the creationary science that I practice, at no time do I to take full credit for the results produced by the Grundlegend-model (G-model), D-world model, GGU-model, GID-model and the MA-model. To be a mathematician, you must know what you are capable of solving. You should not attack a problem unless you know you have, at the least, the ability to solve it. The actual knowledge needed can, usually, be acquired. You need to know the workings of your own mind, so to speak. If you check all of my writings prior to the formulation of these models, you'll find absolutely no such exceptional creativity. I was not capable, in my isolation, to formulate the procedures needed without some sort of aid. The circumstances were highly unusual. I was placed in the right place, at the right time, with the right training. Yet, I couldn't have produced these results without direct spiritual help - help that led me along the correct path of discovery and still does. I give God credit for this work. Only through His guidance, and the many "small," if there is such a thing, miraculous mental events that He accorded me, could I construct these models.

In 1980, not having any knowledge of the actual beliefs of any of the organizations that claim to deal with creationary science, I joined the American Scientific Affiliation (ASA). On 23 August 1981, I presented my first theological paper on the G-model findings at the ASA Annual summer meeting at Eastern College St. David PA. This paper "Mathematical Philosophy - 1981 Status Report" discussed various results relative to a second paper that was under preparation on the rationality of the Scriptures and other concepts. As part of this presentation, I indicated how these new modeling procedures predicted the downfall of certain political systems and, in particular, the USSR. There was no reaction whatsoever from any other members of the ASA. Indeed, I don't recall any individual discussing with me any of my conclusions or methods.

In 1981, I submitted a formal paper to the Journal of the ASA. At that time, the ASA did not appear to me to follow a strong theistic evolutionary policy. The paper "The reasonableness of metaphysical evidence" was published in their journal (34(1)(1982):12-23). The paper discusses the rational predictions made by the G-model and, in particular, how scientific logic (predicate logic, everyday common logic), via a mathematical model, is used to justify the rationality of certain Christian doctrine and Divine attributes. These results show that a philosophic dialectic form of argument is not the basic logic being displayed by the Scriptures. I was very disappointed with the reaction from the journal readers to what, I consider, is a remarkable finding. Indeed, only 12 inquiries for additional information were received.

Then on 21 Jan. 1983, I presented a talk at a winter meeting of the ASA in Washington DC entitled, "The miraculous model." I discussed how the MA-model gives a slight indication, using Scripturally described linguistic concepts, as to how God might, through Divine intervention, produce what would be termed a miraculous event. I strongly stressed during this presentation that although the MA-model contains additional information as to processes that God might use for these purposes, the model also shows that there are many questions one might ask relative to these processes, where such questions have answers. However, these answers can't be presented by means of any description using any humanly comprehensible language. With respect to creationary science, our knowledge is partial and we are, indeed, "seeing through a glass darkly." The ASA newsletter did discuss this presentation and noted that it was the first time that miraculous events, as far as they were concerned, were discussed in a scientific manner. Once again, however, there was no further reaction from ASA members.

On the back of every issue of the Journal of the ASA, you will find Hebrews 1:3 quoted. So, I decided to write yet another paper entitled "The Word" explaining in more detail how these previous findings are established and how they satisfy this quotation. But, I was unable to find any "Journal of the ASA" article that discusses "literal" Divine creation as it is predicted by the MA-model. Until I could find another appropriate publication source, my public activities in creationary science were at an end. One organization did come to my attention at this time, the Creation Research Society (CRS), and its journal the Creation Research Society Quarterly (CRSQ). Although I was warned that the CRS was somewhat unusual in their creationary science notions, I had no difficulty in accepting the CRS "statement of belief." Near the end of April 1983, I submitted this particular article to the CRSQ for consideration. By the end of June 1983, I hadn't, as yet, received any positive comments from the editor.

The following occurred parallel to the above theological activities. In 1980, I was challenged by another professor at the Naval Academy to use the new discipline of Nonstandard Analysis and find actual fixed procedures that would allow for the rigorous infinitesimal modeling for physical-system behavior. Such procedures were discovered and published in 1981. This solved a long-standing problem in mathematical modeling called the Euler-D'Alembert controversy. (These procedures were replaced with but two procedures in 1989.) I, therefore, became a very strict observer of physical-system behavior and split my secular research between abstract mathematics and mathematical modeling. The problem was that in June 1983, I came to a "crossroads" in my creationary scientific activities. The reaction to my secular scientific work was most encouraging, the reaction to my creationary science work most discouraging. Further, I had encountered great political pressure to abandon my creationary science work, since most of my colleagues considered it as nonsense, and to concentrate only upon secular science, secular mathematical modeling and the like.

It is now the morning of 30 June 1983. It was a very calm and warm morning. I was sitting in a rocking chair with my back to the porch door. The sliding glass door was opened, but the screen door was closed. Two of my children were in their rooms and their mother was at work. What was I thinking about as I rocked back-and-forth? I was seeking answers to questions relative to the correctness of the very significant Christian doctrine that I had deduced by means of these mathematical models, questions as to the correctness of the methods used to model mathematically the scriptures, and many more related concerns. These questions, I determined, must somehow or other be answered by God. Further, I had received almost no reaction to my creationary science findings, had no idea when any of my new findings would be published and had been advised to concentrate upon secular science only. If my questions were to be answered, how was God going to do this? One of the questions was relative to the fact that I wasn't yet "born again," as some term it. I was neither indwelled with His spirit nor baptized in accordance with Scriptural directives. If no answers were forthcoming, I would need to conclude that the work was, indeed, useless, that the Bible was not to be taken as literal and that I should give up all this "nonsense." I had absolutely no idea of how God would come to my aid. To say the least, I was most depressed. I said, "God, please help me."

Suddenly, I heard the screen door behind me open halfway. Naturally, I immediately arose and turned to confront any individual who was about to enter, but I saw no one there. Then the door continued moving uniformly and slowly until it was fully opened. This "door opening" event was indeed miraculous and answered immediately one of my questions. I was very startled, but all I did at that moment was to say, out loud, the following highly "scholarly" utterance, "Hey!, He really did it." After Scriptural analysis, this one event answered all the questions I had asked. There was another witness to this event. My, then eight year old, daughter heard all of these events from her room.

My knowledge as to how God intervenes and alters physical-system behavior doesn't come from any philosophic or theological speculation. It comes from actual personal experience. The GGU-model, very partially, explains this door event and shows vaguely that there are created processes that God uses to achieve such a result, but these processes do not exist within the physical-world and it's not possible for us to know any further details, at this time. Please note that absolutely no other observed macroscopic physical events took place immediately before, during or immediately after this "door" event. It was an absolutely singular event. It's clear that numerous so-called physical laws were violated, but the created ultranatural laws were not so violated. Further note that this was a material miraculous event that was not a healing.

Yes, I have since witnessed, and have been associated with, many other events that due to the circumstances can be classified as miraculous. Such events that deal with "healings" and other personal circumstances can often be "explained" using a mostly weak form of materialism. Indeed, this was a strong point of my prior life when I attacked the concepts and "stories" in the Bible. But, the one just described is the most startling, the must unexpected event involving a material object that I have ever observed.

In reality, what this door event displays more than anything else is the inexplicable power of Divine intervention. Consider that throughout all of the vastness of our universe, God "reached down" and performed this one single act - an act that answered every question - without apparently disturbing any other macroscopic physical-system. He did this at the very moment that such an act was needed. He did it in such a manner that I was able to recognize the source immediately. There have been those who have argued, as usually, that all of this occurred naturally. All such arguments are vacuous. Unless you were there at that moment in time, you have no basis for such an argument.

This event answered the most important of my theological questions. However, I won't discuss here all of the many, many questions answered by this one Divine act. My only additional concern is the relation of this event to creationary science. I became a member of CRS due to this event and due to the actual published and literal Bible interpretation championed, in 1983, by the CRS. The MA-model portion of the GGU-model predicts this literal interpretation.

After I received a letter from the Director of the ASA, Robert L. Herrmann (no direct relation) in 1984, which stated that the ASA would not support any literal interpretation of the scriptures but rather accept theistic evolution as a workable thesis, I removed myself from their influence and rejected their philosophy of science. However, I not merely rejected this philosophy but have and will continue to fight against any individual or organization no matter who or what they are, no matter what credentials they present, if they present a creationary model that contradicts this experience. I reject any model that diminishes the supernatural power of Divine creation, any model that makes false claims as to the degree of human comprehension of such events, or does not explicitly follow Scriptural directives. As long as I can continue to do so, I will expose the boasters, the prideful, the high-minded, indeed, those having a form of godliness, but who deny the power thereof. One can ask many questions relative to this described event. But, most are probably not answerable with a humanly comprehensible language while we remain in this "physical state."

Now a personal message to any individual who does not truly believe in the God as described in the Bible. Remember that prior to April 7, 1977, I was like many of you. I was presented with present-day evidence that God exists. I didn't accept this evidence and found numerous arguments why such evidence didn't relate to the God of the Scriptures or, indeed, any god. My absolute experience is as follows: On that April day, I discovered reading Matthew, that it is fact that Jesus is God. Only after, and I repeat after, I accepted this fact did I receive any additional direct or personal evidence that God exists.

All of the observed events that I now classify as miraculous have occurred to me after I totally believed in His existence. All the miraculous events that I have witnessed and understood as miraculous were associated with individuals who completely believe in the supernatural God of the Scriptures. The Biblical statements 1 Cor. 2:10, 12, 14 have been totally verified since actual knowledge of the "deep things of God" has only occurred after I was supernaturally indwelled by His spirit. And, I have actual physical and personal evidence for such an indwelling, and it is not merely a special language. The sequence of events that I have just described is Scriptural as I found out after the experiences occurred. Since I mostly exist within an atheistic scientific society, I am often exposed to "immature" arguments against the existence of the God of the Scriptures. I'm never enticed by any such arguments for it's a fact that the above-described singular event has sustained me through many a difficult adventure. All I need to do is to simply stop and recall what occurred on that very quiet and warm June morning many years ago.

21 April 1999. Revised 1 FEB 2008.

Click back button, or if you retrieved this file directly from the Internet, then return to top of home page. If you retrieved this file while on my website, then return to top of home page.