If this is how to define a miracle then obviously child birth is a miracle, because it is the realization that a normal biological event has brought a brand new life into the world. If one considers that the Nike advert the realization and self fulfillment of individual attaining goals that are believed to beyond that individual’s capabilities can be considered wonderful. The main difference between Hobbs’ miracle story structure and the Nike advert is that usually a miracle is the realization of the divine; as opposed to self-fulfillment of the individual. Yet, as Hobbs indicates a miracle changes with society and culture; therefore in modern culture a lot of what was thought miraculous and the act of the divine can be explained through scientific fact. Therefore the miraculous is more to do with faith, whether it is in the divine, nature or one’s self. Hence, the angle of the miraculous as self-realization, as life changing or wonderful then in the modern era where a considerable amount of people have turned away from the external belief of the divine to self-fulfillment. In many ways the Nike advert is like the miracle story presented by Hobbs because it is indicating that there are wonderful, life changing events as long as one has either faith in themselves or the divine. The main difference is that the divine is no longer necessary.
2) Read Staley and Walsh, “Hayes” and Note at least three significant differences between the three versions of the story (think in terms of plot, setting, dialogue, characters). How would most scholars account for the similarities? What might account for the differences?
Hayes’ family movie of Jesus is quite an interesting take, because it picks parts from the Gospels of Mark, Luke and John and creates another version of the miracles of Jesus. The first interesting point is that Hayes uses Luke’s version of Mary Magdalene whereby