miracles

responses

- responses to problem of evil defend existence of natural disasters because part of the ordered world we live in and if god intervenes we won't be able to learn and understand our world. - some say god does act but we don't notice it e.g. tsunami in south east asia in dec 2004 newspaper headlines were asking 'why did god let this happen' negative events are often blamed on god but the people that survived could be seen as a miracle - Rudolph Bultmann suggested all miracles are myths. the stories are made to communicate eternal reality of the universe, god created it and cntinuines to work in and through it so bible is symbolic.

do miracles occur? swinburne

also considers what evidence would be needed to support a belief that a miracle has occured and in doing so challenges some of the practical arguments miracles put forward by hume. swinburne questions ho you efine when people are educted. hume gives no method of recognising level of education. swinburne also questions what is meant by ignorant and barbarous. it could mean people lack a familiarity with science but this doesn't really help hume as many people today are undoubtedly educated and yet still claim to experience miracles. swinburne also questions miracles in different religions cancel each other out. said miracles in any religion aren't usually about proving religious traditions correct and other's wrong. e.g. if a miracle was reported to have happened at lourdes (catholic shrine) and makkah doesn't necessarily have anything do with proving one religion right and other wrong. miracls normally involve god helping people like healing them. although these r different in different religions, this doesn't mean they cancel each other out

miracle

an event caused by God - this view is traditionally supported by Christians such as Aquinas a violation of the laws of nature - associated with Hume

can modern people believe in miracles

bible presents a clear picture of a world in which god is the creator and which god is immanently involved in god is seen as acting in the world and as helping his followers. 2 aspects to the question: problems raised by god acting in the world in Joshua 10 arguments against miracles as in Joshua 10 being real

criticisms of wiles

christian tradition - clearly depicts god acting in the worls in a far more direct way than wiles suggests stories of miracles in the bible indicate that god acts in the world. if it is believed that god does intervene in the world in a direct way and causes miracles to happen, wiles views don't fully reflect the nature of god human rationality - wiles arugment depends on the fact human rationality can be appleid directly to god. questions about god's actions being arbitrary and baised only arise if you first suggest god's actions have to conform to some form of rational order that we understand. for some religious believers god cannot be limited to what is rationally possible god is a mystery whose purpose and nature transcend human abilities to interpret and understand them. in judeo christian traiditon the book of job depicts job challenign god, job reaches no conclusions but still ccepts god, for some believers god's purposes ultimately remain beyond human understanding christian god - polkinghorne argues wiles view of god's action in the world doesn't reflect christian religious experience of god. e.g. difficult to make sense in a traditional way of the idea of petitionary prayers that make requests of god, yet many people claim god answers prayers. polkinghorne points to the fact that many scientists are also christians but have no reject possibility god acts in world. for other modern religious scholars christian tradition does point to he fact god can act in the world and leaves the question open about god's ability to act in the worlds in response to particularly needs and situations

swinburne argument

considers what is meant by natural laws. hume emphasises the fixed and universal nature of natural laws. swinrbuen agrees natural laws based on people's experiences of observing the world but he emphasises 2 points distinct from hume - laws of nature are generalisations, i.e. communicate a general picture of how things work as simply as possible says all natural laws are corrigible. this means law of nature is bst description of ho the world works that we currently have but of course new discoveries may mean law of nature has to be modified or changed. hume doesn't consider this said they were fixed leads swinburne to define a miracle as 'an occurrence of a non-repeatable counter instance to a law of nature.' swinburne meant a miracle is an event that doesn't fit in with the laws of nature as we understand them but the even on its own is not enough to prove the law of nature inaccurate. you could not define a lnew law from this one instance when an event occurs which doesn't fit in with the law this event is a one off. it is unrepeatable. it would be rather illogical to say that a law of nature is wrong just becuse of one incident or that the occurrence of an incident automatically to be doubted because it seems to break natural laws. conclusion is laws of nautre are good general descriptions of how the world works but that doesn't remove possibility of a miracle

the modern debate about the definition of miracle

definition of miracle makes a major difference to how a possible miraculous event such as Jeanne Fretel is interpreted. (had tuberculosis and went on pilgrimage to lourdes and there all her symptoms of illness disappared, catholics believe virgin mary appeared when they were in a grotto. doctor said she had completely cured). ward has responded to hume's claims suggesting the phrase 'violation of the laws of nature' is unhelpful since it sets up a thought that there is something wrong with believing in miracles. swinburne in his criticisms does not use the phrase violation of the law of nature instead he calls miracles 'counter instances of human nature'.

god's activity in the world as described in bible

fair to s ay there is much controversy about whether god acts in the world and performs miracles. bible says clearly god does act int he world. david hume puts forward a strong argument that violations of laws of nature take place. swinburne and other philosophers have highlighted weaknesses with hume. swinburne puts forward argument for suggesting miracles may possibly happen also suggested evidence that could be considered to help decide if an event is a miracle

not ruling out miracles

few scientists argue in favour of literal belief in a miracle like the incident in joshua 10 but many scientists do acknowledge the possibility of god acting in the world but: few scientists would tak about god 'violating the laws of nature' many would discuss the possibility of god acting in the world through natural laws: Polkinghorne argues god can act in the world but he explains this in a rather different way from some f the biblical images. he points out many scientists who have become theologians such as Peacock do not limit god's role to starting things things off.instead they see god as active in creation e.g. peacock suggests god acts trough events which dont break the laws of nature. polkinghorne also comments the idea that god only acts through people: intelligent life hat can think about what it does has only existed for a few million years, therefore if god acts only through people it implies he is an 'inactive spectator' if god works through people this means god is working in nature and affecting the physical laws of the world, P sees people as unity of body and soul. so if god acts through us god is affecting the way physical processes of the world work by affecting you. this leaves possibility of god intervening. laws of nature that govern universe aren't as rigid as hume suggests. particles that exist operate in a non-determined way they don't follow laws of physics hat enable you to exactly describe their behaviour. this is not because physics h as not found he law, it is because the laws indicate the behaviour of very small quantum particles is indeterminate (not totally knowable). universe is much more varied environment than hume imagined .some scientists argue its an open question whether events happen that dont fit nearly into our understanding of the laws of nature. swinburne also suggested god may occasionally suspend his own laws of nature. compares this to parents rules, parents teach rules but occasionally exceptions made to rules. say to children don't lie but then throw surprise party so they have to lie

problems raised by god's actions

god is shown in the bible as: healing people throwing hailstones from heaven defeating armies drowning soldiers answering prayers creating storms if god has such powr and is good why goes god not work miracles to help people and prevent suffering? many people point to examples such as the millions of people who died in concentration camps in WW2 and ask why if god has the power does he not work a miracle to help innocent. christianity god is described as being both loving and omnipotent. problem many people point to is not just the fact that human beings do evil things. this could be explained by saying god gave us free will to choose how to behave. sometimes people commit evil actions with their free will. the more serious problem is the bible depicts god as holding back the sun, throwing hailstones controlling floods etc. if god has power to do this he can prevent natural disasters such as tsunamis which kill innocent people. the fact miracles seem to happen so rarely in the modern world raises questions abotu whether god performs miracles arbitarily (appears to be no purpose or pattern to the occurence of miracles or random) if this was true would suggest god isn't omnipotet or omniscient but rather changeable unpredictable.

do miracles violate the laws of nature

hume yes. swinbrune suggests laws of nature are probabilistic meaning the laws of nature are actually describing what will happen sometimes most likely things do happen. e.g. miles of golden sand with one grain of red, you'd still say sand was gold and if you picked up a grain it's most likely gold but could be red unlikely possibility but could happen. he said quantum laws govern the whole universe have been clearly shown by scientists to be probabilistic.

how are contingency miracles different from other experiences in life

if they're not then they're just lik other normal events in life. tillich said miracles are revelatory they reveal something about god this revelation is from god. this is what is distinctive about miracles and makes them different to other events. the person who experiences it knows what they have received through faith. these can happen in natural world without violating natural laws because god is creator and sustainer. many reject tillich because while they might argue miracle experiences are revelatory, there is nor eal way to prove a person who has experienced a miracle really did experience this might be a product of the mind. since the experiences are said not to violate the laws of nature, it rejects criticisms of hume. it also reflects some biblical traditions that emphasise the nature of miracles as signs. contingency view doesn't well reflect the picture of god cuasing miracles and healings such as in jewish scripture if taken literally god seems to violate laws of nature e.g. capture of jericho jeanne fretel: - hume - recovery although unlikely not impossible so probably natural - swinburne - what seems most probable doesn't rule out miracle, taking in evidence from other stories from lourdes could be a miracle - tillich - since jeanne thought she'd been healed by god it could be a miracle

new testament

jesus' birth - god acting in the world and for christians becoming present in the world. jesus said by christian to be god incarnate meaning god made flesh. jesus' life is an example of god acting in the world jesus' death and resurrection - gospel stories end with the accounts of god raising jesus from the dead. for christians the resurrection is the most important act of god in the bible because it opens up the possibility of eternal life to all people. this eternal life has been lost by adam and eve.

bias and god

joshua goes into battle and never loses because god favours him and fights with him. in other stories the lack of god support leads to suffering. god causes king david's and bathsheba's child to die as a punishment of the parents for their adultery. if these are taken literally god favours one people the israelites because god and the people have made an agreement. israel worships god and he protects them. some of the stories in the bible such as the sun standing still can be interpreted using science is if god changed laws of nature. saying this raises new questions as to why evil exists with god's power. for many religious believers god's actions and god are mystery and beyond human understanding. this point is made many times in the bible e.g. paul in NT

why do miracles matter for religious believers

miracles are of great importance to many religious believers but reasons they are important can vary. broadly speaking reasosn for miracles being sig may be divided: miracles support arguments for god's existence miracles are signs of god continuing activity in the world miracles show prayers are answered miracle of resurrection show jesus is from god show god's providence of course many people canhold all these views at once. miracles support arguments for god's existence - for some christians occurrence of miracles caused by god in the world. many modern religious philosophers on their own sufficient to prove god exists taken together a range of different arguments for god's existence may be a good reason to believe god exists. this type of view is called a cumulative argument for the argument of god. miracles are signs of god's continuing activity in the world - if someone is healed miraculously then this points towards god and he is active. miracles show prayers are answered - large no. of accounts show peple who are healed after they pray. god is loving and acts in the world miracle of resurrection - important foundational event. jesus' resurrection was miraculous and so may be said to violate natural laws. jesus and god - jesus is the son of god, miracles point to god and jesus performs them providence - he is active and sustains to reveal himself. general providence - this refers to goodness of creation special providence - refers to god acting in world on particular occassions e.g. a person's prayer

arguments against miracles

miracles violate the laws of nature such as the sun standing still doesn't really happen. Hume said: lack of probability - probability of miracles happening is so low that it is irrational and illogical to believe they occur. hes an empiricist meaning he emphasises experience and observations of the worls as the way of learning new things: when investigating miracles, evidence can be collected from human witnesses laws of nature appear to be fixed and unvarying. e.g. gravity same throughout universe miracles appear to violate the laws of nature it is more likely the report of a miracle happening is incorrect than laws of nature be violated. e.g. jesus raising lazarus from the dead, people witnessed the event in bible. but people who are dead don't come back to life so this leads to conflict of natural laws and miracles. more likely to not have happened practical argument against miracles - lack of convincing testimony from educated people - they're not reported bye ducated people according to hume. he said stories circulate and get exaggerated and suggested this sort of gossiping was part of human nature. urban myths still happen in modern day e.g. hurricane katrina it was reported all around the world that law and order had broken down and the chief of police announced that two baby girls had been assaulted and raped. however the new orleans police invesitgated this and found no evidence and no evidence for breakdown of law and looting. miracles only seen to happen among ignorant and barbarous people - hume argued if you look at the history of countries their earliest stories are full of miracles visions and so on but as the nation develops and becomes educated these sorts of stories disappear. he looked at genesis and exodus adam lived for 930 ears he says this is arbitary. concludes that none of these events that violate the laws of nature are probable. contradictory reports of miracles occurring in different religions - if one religion claimed that a miracle proved their religion true the value of this statement is cancelled out by the fact that other religions equall claim miracles happen that prove the truth of that religion.. miracles most likely false

bible and god's activity

paints a picture of god being closely involved with creation and acting in it and this is clearly seen in the story of joshua's defeat of 5 kings in joshua 10 - throws his enemies into confusion and control's joshua with his power

Wiles on god's action in the world

rejected idea of god acting in the world and violating laws od nature, reject idea of explaining jeanne fretel with god's activity. he suggested the sole activity of god was to create and sustain the world. god doesn't intervene in the world in the way hume and others had in mind. wiles rejected traditional idea of god causing miracels to happen that appear to violate laws of nature. he didn't believe miracles happen because: miracles are violations of the laws of nature they have to occur infrequently to avoid concept of laws of nature becoming meaningless pattern of the occurrence of miracles appears strange large number of evil events that aren't prevented by god raises questions about god's omnipotence and goodness argues against view of god acting in world and is good and yet doesn't prevent WW2 holocaust. in case of miracles people percieve a contrast between one person being healed like jeanne fretel and thousands dying in events like 2004 tsunami. a view of god who acts in the world and works miracles leads into all the difficulties in religion with problem of evil. he also rejected god responding to prayers as god acting in the world shows he is arbitrary or biased. he thought god revealed himself through the creation of the universe and this as a whole shows god is present as he sustains universe and causes it to exist

hume's inductive problem

says it is irrational to believe in miracles occuring because they violate laws of nature. he believes in the laws of nature because empirical observations support the claim that there are laaws of nature and that these laws are universal. so hume is arguing inductively from observations that the law of nature are such they cannot violated. hume concludes the evidence concerning how the laws of nature function is such that any account of a miracle occuring is much less likely to be true than an account which explains the miracle didn't occur. hume's agument can be challenged by new evidence. which interpretation of an account of a miracle best matches the empirical evidence gained from observation and experience? if something is probable doesn't mean it's true. so miracles even if improbable can't rule out completely. although his argument can be challenged it doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong.

contingency definition of miracles

some religious people say a miracle is a sign pointing to god. this view is often called contingency definition of miracles and the definition is very popular with modern scholars. crucial point is miracles are signs from god that is miracles are event of great religious significance. e.g. jesus feeding the 5 thousand. the event had significance to people of time and would have reminded them of moses feeding the people in the desert when the israelite slaves were escaping from egypt. in NT jesus is pictured as a worker of signs and works of power. word that is never used is miracle. the early church used word but for the first christians writing about jesus his miracles are signs from god. these signs are wonderful but the crucial point is that the remarkable sign is from god as opposed to anyone else. jesus curing person is a sign of god's love. in the bible events people today call miracles are carried out by many biblical characters. the point about miracles of jesus is that they are a religious significance meaning they reveal something about god to people. for some people like tillich miracles are better seen as signs with religious significance.

some modern arguments against miracles

some scientists present arguments similar to hume's practical arguments. Atkins a chemist argues against miracles suggesting that people seek publicity or are deluded or hallucinate and so on. while this may sometimes be the case, this is open to criticisms swinburne made about hume, you can't assume people are ill-educated and what matters is the evidence is tested and assessed. dawkins puts forward a range of points against miracles: people have strange experiences and disturbing experiences e.g. dreaming about someone who turns out to be dead in real life, other experiences could be coincidences sometimes you may expect people to have coincidental experiences in life to which they attach special significance lourdes could be explained by the placebo effect, people go to lourdes believing they will be cured and they are then cured. dawkins argues strongly he wouldn't rule out people being cured by psychological means however he would doubt occasions such as people gettin up out a wheelchair and walking. he stresses these poitns: miracles are improbable there are scientific was of explaining these effetc sthat don't require god as an explanation hume and dawkins re similar as both agree with violations of human nature. same criticisms raise against hume can be used here

swinburne's evidence for miracles

suggests hume is wrong to say no evidence or witness is reliable enough for us to say that miracles happen. swinburne suggests there are ways of collecting evidence that would enable one to decide whther a miracle had happened: memories of our experiences testimony by other people about their experiences physical traces of the event like medical examination of a person been healed understanding of modern science what is thought to be physically impossible or most improbable. e.g. someone healed of aids would be impossible with science swinburne says in terms of the evidence as in any matter of debate you have to assess the evidence a deduce a conclusion. swinburne then suggests some factors you use in any discussion about interpreting events that happened in the past. main argument - accept as any sources of evidence as possible. the more evidence there is to support the miracle claim the stronger the probability the miracle actually happened subsidiary argument - difference sources of evidence should be consisent value you place on a particular piece of evidence should depend upon the empirical reliability of the evidence e.g. if a witness to a miracle is aknown liar wouldn't take his evidence against someone you trust avoid rejecting without good reason pieces of evidence that may be relevant swinburnes suggestions aren't claiming that miracles do happen but swinburne is quire clearly saying it is impossible they happen and unlike david hume you shouldn't automatically be skeptical and reject a story about miracle without considering the evidence. essence of swinburne makes it hume is mistaken in rejecting all witnesses' statements about miracles. we have to examine seriously what a person claims when they say they have witnesses or experienced a miracle we shouldn't reject automatically

Tillich on contingency definition of miracles

supported a contingency definition of miracles. according to him a miracle is a sign event something that is of religious significance and tells us abotu god. this idea comes from the miracles in the bible which are signs from god. tillich emphasised the fact that from the time immediately after jesus' death what has been emphasised is the strange or unnatural nature of a miracle not its role as sign in jesus' ministry. there are many stories in the NT this suggests the miraculous nature of miracles has been overemphasised instead of focusing on their role as signs. he said: miracles are astonishing but without contradicting the rational structure of reality, by this he meant that miracles are astonishing events but that doesn't mean they have to violate the laws of nature miracles point to what tillich called 'mystery of being' god meaning they reveal something about god's nature miracles are received as a sign event in an ecstatic experience, meaning the miracle event reveals god to people and it is this revelation which causes the ecstatic overwhelming experience for the recipient

did people in biblical times believe god acted in the world?

there is no doubt people spoke of god helping them to victory they meant god acted in history and helped them achieve victory. miracles and other events are signs of god being immanent in history and of god's omnipotence over creation. miracles of jesus were signs poitning to god that revealed god to the people. these were realities for the people of the time and by nature miracles were remarkable events that people found significant.

god's actions cause miracles to happen is this a good theory?

there is no one clear undisputed view either in favour or against the occurrence of miracles. contingency definiton of miracles makes miracles a reality in an individual's group's faith life. hume and swinburne disagree about whether there is evidence for miracles or not. wiles ideas abotu god's aciton in the world fit in with modern science but don't make any sense of traditional christian claims that god really does act in the world. sometimes in a way that violates the laws of nature. however another way to assess god causing miracles is a god explanation of these strange events is to consider whether this is a good theory 'a good theory will describe a large range of phenomena on the basis of a few simple postulates and will make definite predictions that can be tested' - hawking. hawking is suggesting a god theory is one that is straightforward and uncomplicated from which you can make prediction abotu the world and you can test. wwhat cannot do is prove your theory true but you can build up evidence the theory is correct. if we apply this to miracles we could consider the explanation: god causes miracles. this explains the occasions when miracles are said to have happened. from the explanation we coul predict tha more miracles will happen in the future

can people believe in miracles given the findings of modern science?

this important as many christians believe god acts in the world and also regard science as important and accurate description of how the world works. hume argued scientific discoveries suggested the chance of a miracle being real were extremely low. however his arguments have been criticised by people liek swinburne. hume emphasises the fixed nature of natural laws and he leaves little room for development and change. Einsteins work is the basis of much work in modern physics his general law of relativity replaced Newton's law on physics which hume will have learnt. many modern scientists have debated the reality of miracles like philosophers. ultimately the individual person has to decide what is more probable god causes miracles or they are explained in other ways