Hannah's Miracles cards Flashcards
Swinburne
‘God inclining natural laws to act in a probabilistic way; a set of coincidences manipulated by god working within natural laws’
1) more evidence, more likely a miracle occurred
2) different evidence should support each other
3) how valuable is a piece of evidence?
Flew
Rejects that miracles are brought about by God, instead suggesting we don’t fully understand the human mind yet, and there is more scientific research needed than saying ‘God did it’. The mind may be able to bring about physical changes in the body e.g. placebo effect
Tillich
Supports the contingency definition of miracles, arguing that miracles are a sign event, something of religious significance which tells us of God. They are not contradictory to the laws of nature, they reveal the ‘mystery of being’
Holland
The contingency definition of miracles; suggests miracles are coincidental events given religious significance. Gives the example of a boy who is stuck in a toy car on a railway track, train comes and stops just before him. His mother see’s it as a miracle, yet the train driver passed out and trigger the emergency break.
Hume’s argument from induction
Hume’s definition of a miracle is violation of the laws of nature, however he argued we inductively generalise actions and the more we see an action, the more we expect it to happen. Therefore, if a miracle is a violation of the laws of nature, then this is highly improbable if not impossible.
Humes 4 other subsidiary arguments
1) many accounts of miracles are from ‘ignorant and barbarous nations
2) surely miracles of different religions cancel each other out
3) people love to exaggerate and gossip if given the chance- they continue to tell stories they know are false
4) there has never been a miracle witnessed by a reliable witness
Bible miracles
plagues in Egypt to make the Pharaoh release the Jews from slavery; parting of the red sea for the Israelites; sun stands still in sky; miracles of Jesus - feeding 5,000; walking on water; water into wine; healing paralysed man.
Problems of Gods miracles…
1) Joshua sees God intervening in a battle and sending hailstones to help the minority win a battle, this raises issues of the characteristics of God and is God partisan?
2) the natural order of the world points to a designer, if nature is as god intended, then why break and intervene in natural laws
3) evil and suffering are derived from free will which allows humans to grow and develop. yet god intervenes sometimes and allows a small number of people to escape the consequences of evil - is god partisan?
4) could be claimed we are limiting Gods nature if we refuse to believe in miracles
Aquinas
Events which happen by the divine power beyond the order commonly observed in nature. 3 ranks:
1) highest rank, something that nature could never do. e.g. make the earth spin backwards
2) second rank, something nature can do but not in the order and sequence. e.g give a blind man sight
3) third rank, something nature can do, but done without working principles. e.g. fixing a broken leg immediately.
Polkinghorne
Defends the possibility of miracles, especially the resurrection. all science suggests is that a given event is against expectations, but cannot be completely ruled out. the question is whether it makes sense for God to do this. natural laws don’t change, yet consequences do in new regimes. consequences of the laws change if god begins to deal with humans differently e.g. the resurrection
C.S Lewis
Were either naturalists; believing the world is totally physical and material, and that nothing else exists. Or, we are supernaturalists and believe in non physical things such as God. For lewis, naturalism is self defeating. if you accept the ideas of God, then you can accept the ideas of miracles. naturalists make assumptions is the world being merely physical
Swinburne- principle of testimony and creudility
Principle of testimony- we should believe what one says
principle of credulity- we should believe evidence unless we have reason not to
Swinburne and science… criticising Hume.
Our understanding of natural laws could always change with more scientific discoveries, todays laws of nature are descriptive NOT prescriptive. They are subject to change and don’t always describe what will happen e.g. quantum physics, where particles can leave randomly. laws of nature are not always fixed, they are just probabilistic.
Swinburne- principle of testimony and creudility
Principle of testimony- we should believe ones account unless we have reason not to
Principle of Creudility-we ought to accept evidence unless we have evidence that they are mistaken
Poppers Falsification (criticises humes induction)
No one records a natural event until they believe its true, peoples minds don’t work like this- they believe something until they have one bit of evidence to falsify it. e.g. cave men recording sun rise every morning on wall, then saying “we have collected much evidence to believe in the sunrise”, the mind doesn’t work like this.
