Miracle Flashcards
What are the various definitions of miracles that have been suggested?
- A miracle is an event which violates the laws of nature and which is brought about by the action of God
- A miracle is an event that has religious significance
- A miracle is an event caused by God
What is the definition of a miracle as an event which violates the laws of nature?
This is the traditional and most popular view developed by David Hume, and it is centered around the definition of a miracle as a violation of natural law. This definition also shows a God who intervenes in the world, interacts with people and is involved in creation.
What is the problem of the definition of miracle as an event which violates the laws of nature?
It can be seen as too narrow. Not all miracles are violations of the laws of nature but instead can be amazing coincidences that have religious significance. Religious significance may be the most important factor in defining a miracle. Also we may not know all the laws of nature.
What is the definition of a miracle as an event that has religious significance?
According to this definition an event does not need to have broken the laws of nature to be regarded as a miracle but reveals something about God. This view does not require an interventionist God ubt sees miracles as events which reveal divine purpose and does not require belief in a God who intervenes occasionally to help some favoured individuals.
What did R.F. Holland argue about miracles?
He argued that a miracle is nothing more than an extraordinary coincidence that is seen in a religious way. The example he gives is that of the train driver who has a heart attack and falls onto the brakes of the train “miraculously” saving a child stuck on the tracks. He’s definition is that a miracle is dependent on personal interpretation which is subjective.
What is an interventionist God?
One who acts in the world and is involved with his creation.
What is the definition of a miracle as an event caused by God?
This is the view of Thomas Aquinas who defined miracles as “those things…which are done by divine power apart from the order generally follows in things”. This view allows the possibility of miracles to occur within the system of ‘natural activity’ and allows the possibility that God’s activity may be part of the natural order of things. Further defined by Aquinas as “events in which God does something which nature can do, but not in that order” and “when God does what is usually done by the working of nature, but without the operation of the principles of nature”
How is God pictured in the Bible?
As being involved and active in the world. Philosophers would say that the Biblical image of God shows him to be omnipotent and immanent. Immanent is used to mean that God is active and closely involved in creation.
What is meant by immanent?
Existing or operating within; God permanently pervading and sustaining the universe.
What is meant by transcendent?
Beyond or above the physical human experience.
How quote did David Hume use define a miracle?
“A miracle may be accurately defined, ‘A transgression of a law of nature by a particular violation of the Deity or by the interposition of some invisible agent”
What is the problem with Thomas’ Aquinas definition of miracles? (an event caused by God)
It is too broad as it can be difficult to attribute an event to God just because it is extraordinary or we lack the understanding of how it occurred. It leaves room for a lot of subjective interpretation.
What happens in Joshua 10?
God allows Joshua to gain victory by throwing the enemy into confusion, throwing hailstones from the sky and making the sun stand still. Joshua is painted as the servant who accompanies God.
What is meant by the word bias?
Unfairly favouring one person or group above another.
What is a serious issue that arises from the stories of miracles i the Bible in terms of God being bias?
If the stories of the miracles i the Jewish scriptures in particular are taken literally, God favours on people, the Israelites, because God and the people had made an covenant. Although it is important to note that at the time all people believed that their God fought with them. Moreover the idea of God being biased assumes his actions fit in with human ideas of rationality, whereas his actions are often described as mysterious.
What is the issues with miracles in terms of the problem of evil?
If God has such power and is good, why does God not work miracles to help people or to prevent suffering. In the Bible God is depicted as holding back the sun, throwing hailstones and controlling floods and storms, so if God has the power to do this why does he not prevent natural disasters where the innocent suffer?
What is the issue with whether God performs miracles arbitrarily?
The fact that miracles seem to happen so rarely in the modern world raises a question about whether God performs miracles ‘arbitrarily’ (randomly). If this was the case it would suggest a changeable, unpredictable God.
What is the conclusion of David Hume’s arguments against miracles?
The conclusion is that it is always more rational to doubt the truth of testimony or miracles than it is to believe it.
What quote does Swinburne use to explain the necessary of miracles to hold some deeper significance than the transgression itself?
“If a God intervened in the natural order to make a feather land here rather than there for no deep ultimate purpose, or to upset a child’s box of toys just for spite, these events would not naturally be described as miracles”
What quote does R.F. Holland use to explain his view of miracles?
“A coincidence can be taken religiously as a sign and called a miracle”
What quote does David Hume use to criticise the definition of a miracle as an event with religious significant that doesn’t necessarily transgress the laws of nature?
“Nothing is esteemed a miracle, it it ever happens in the common course of nature”
Why might certain theists doubt the existence of natural laws?
The would argue that every single event in the world is totally and directly dependent upon God. If God is equally present in every action, it would not make sense to speak of His ‘intervention’. Nevertheless, the majority of theists would accept that it is through natural laws that God continues to sustain the world, and in this case it still makes sense to say that in certain exception circumstances, God can choose to interrupt the working of His laws.
What quote does Brian Davies use to explain why some theists may be against the definition of a miracle as a violation of natural laws?
For such people “God is as present in what is not miraculous as he is in the miraculous”
What is a theist?
Someone who believes that the world was not only made by God, but that its existence continues to depend totally on the involvement of its creator.
How does John Hick define natural laws?
As “generalizations formulated retrospectively to cover whatever has, in fact, happened”
Why does John Hick argue against the definition of miracles as a transgression of natural laws?
It has been argued that our definition of natural laws can preclude the possibility of anything being termed a miracle. John Hick defines natural law as generalizations of what has happened in the past, so “we can declare a priori that there are no miracles”, as the occurrence of an unusual, previously unwitnessed event should make us widen our understanding of the natural so as to incorporate the possibility of the new event. There would be no grounds for assuming that this new event breaks the law, for the law itself is only established on the basis of empiricle evidence.
How does Swinburne respond to Hick’s argument against the definition of a miracle as a transgression of natural laws?
Swinburne allows that natural laws are not adequately able to cover every single possible happening everywhere. He believes, however, that they are able to give a generally accurate picture of what we should expect to happen in a given situation. He concludes therefore than an event such as the Resurrection could reasonably be considered miraculous, since it is totally contrary to the normal results of death and since it would not be expected to happen again in similar circumstances.
What quote does David Hume use to summarize his criticism of miracles?
“A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can be possibly imagined.”
What is Hume’s main point in his critique of miracles?
He’s point is not so much that miracles are impossible, but that it would be impossible for us ever to prove that one had happened.
What quote does Hume use to explain why the testimony of miracles is not sufficient proof?
“No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavors to establish; and even in that case there is a mutual destruction of arguments, and the superior only gives us assurance to that degree of force, which remains, after deducting the inferior.”
What are the five reasons that Hume criticizes miracles?
- It is unreckonably more probable that the miracle be false than the evidence in favour of the natural law be proved incorrect
- Miracles do not generally have many sane and reliable witnesses
- Those testifying to the miracle will have a natural tendency to suspend their reason and support the claim
- Mainly happens among “ignorant and barbarous nations”
- Miracle accounts arising from each religious tradition cancel each other out
What does he mean when Hume criticizes miracles because it is unreckonably more probable that the miracle be false than the natural law be proved incorrect?
He’s argument is that laws of nature have been supported innumerably over a period of many hundreds of years. An apparent miracle, therefore, which contradicts a natural law, would need to outweigh all the evidence that had established the law in the first place. Therefore, it is more likely that the miracle be false than the evidence in favour of the natural law be proved false.
What quote does David Hume use to suggest that miracles do not generally have many sane and reliable witnesses?
There has never been “…in all history, any miracle attested by a sufficient number of men, of such unquestioned good-sense, education and learning, as to secure us against all delusion in themselves”
What quote does David Hume use to suggest that miracles come from ignorant nations?
“it forms a strong presumption against all supernatural and miraculous relations that they are observed chiefly to abound among ignorant and barbarous nations”
What quote does David Hume use to suggest that miracles from different religions cancel each other out?
“Every miracle, therefore, pretended to have been wrought in any of these religions (and all of them abound in miracles), as its direct scope is to establish the particular system to which it is attributed; so has it the same force, though more indirectly, to overthrow every other system. In destroying a rival system, it likewise destroys the credit of those miracles, on which that system was established.”
What is the issue with Hume’s argument that natural laws, as scientific evidence, always outweigh the evidence for miracles?
Hume’s argument is based on the assumption that there must be a mutually exclusive choice between the generally accepted law on the one hand and the miraculous exception on the other. However, the whole point to a miracle is that it is an exception to the rule, as such its occurrence in no way challenges the force of the general rule, except on that occasion.
Why does Brian Davies criticize David Hume’s argument that natural laws, as scientific evidence, always outweigh the evidence for miracles?
If Hume’s argument were to be accepted, we should need to reject a large proportion of the scientific development in recent centuries. This is because many of these have forced us to accept as possible things that would have once been considered impossible upon the basis of past events.
What example does Brian Davies give to criticise David Hume’s argument that natural laws, as scientific evidence, always outweigh the evidence for miracles?
“We might say (though rather oddly) that until someone walked on the moon, people were regularly observed not to walk on the moon. And people, in time have come to do what earlier generations would rightly have taken to be impossible on the basis of their experience.” If we accept Hume’s argument, then we would have had to refuse to moon landing for it contradicted previous knowledge.
Why does Richard Swinburne criticize Hume’s assumption that natural laws, as scientific evidence, will always outweigh the evidence for miracles?
Swinburne argues that out knowledge of scientific law is based on the three types of evidence that can also be used to support miracles; this include our apparent memories, the testimony of others, and the physical traces left by the events in question. If such evidence is not sufficient to establish the occurrence of a miracle, neither is it sufficient to establish the certainty of a natural law.
What is the problem with Hume’s argument that there have never been enough sane and reliable witnesses for miracles?
He did not explain what a ‘sufficient number’ would be, nor why he considered previous testimonies insufficient.
What is the problem with Hume’s argument that miracles only occur in ignorant nations?
His claim that miracles “abound in ignorant and barbarous nations” is hard to accept, since just about every nation has provided such claims.
What are the four main criticisms as to whether or not any miracles have in fact occurred?
- Some miracle accounts can be explained away as coincidences
- Some miracle accounts appear pointless
- Other miracle accounts should be rejected upon moral grounds
- Other miracle accounts are not supported by sufficient evidence.
Why are some miracle accounts rejected as they appear pointless?
This criticism concerns the point that same miracle accounts do not fulfil Swinburne’s requirement of attesting to some deeper significance as there may seem to be no particular reason why this phenomenon should take place or why it is of any religious significance.
Why are some miracle accounts rejected upon moral grounds?
This criticism concerning the actual occurrence of certain miracles is that they may be incompatible with the justice and love of God. Many miracle accounts involve God intervening in the world to bring about some benefit to those who worship him, though he does not seem to intervene equally. It could be argued he acts in a biased and arbitrary fashion.
What quote does Richard Swinburne use to argue that a miracle would point to the existence of agents other than humans?
“Suppose that E occurs in ways and circumstances otherwise strongly analogous to those in which occur events brought about intentionally by human agents, and that other violations occur in such circumstances. We would then be justified in claiming that E and other such violations are, like effects of human actions brought about by agents, but agents unlike men in not being material objects.”
What is Richard Swinburne’s argument that a miracle would point to the existence of agents other than humans?
Swinburne’s argument suggests that the effects of miracles, such as a tumour disappearing, are strongly analogous to the work of human agents (surgeons curing a tumour) and as such we should reasonably postulate a non-material cause however, on account of the ‘slight difference’ in effects- for example, the fact that no material interference is involved in bringing it about.
What is the problem with Swinburne’s argument that a miracle would point to the existence of agents other than humans?
In some cases a natural, but as yet undiscovered, reason may be the cause of the effect. In some cases at least, therefore, there would be no grounds to suspect the involvement of non-material beings. Even if we accept his conclusions, what grounds are there for attributing the miracles to God?
What quote does Hume use about belief and evidence?
“A wise man proportions his belief according to the evidence”
What is David Hume?
- An empiricist- he believed that knowledge of the world comes from the observations made by our senses
- A sceptic- He argued that we cannot reason accurately beyond what we see and hear as this requires us to make assumptions
What is Hume’s theoretical case against miracles?
He defines a miracle as a transgression of a law of nature. He says that the laws of nature that we experience are uniform and constant. He notes we establish cause and effect relationships based on our experience of the world. The more experiences we have of an event, the less likely it is that the opposite will occur. Hume suggests that the only evidence available to us is the testimonies of others and concludes that we ought only to believe a miracle story if it would be more incredible that all witnesses were mistaken than if the event were true.
