Miracles: ReviewMr. DeZilva

Defining MiracleO Comes from the Latin miraculum, meaning “wonder”O A miracle is an extraordinary and striking event,

intended by God to be a special disclosure of his power and purpose.

O Hume: “A violation of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity or by the interposition of some invisible agent”

O Aquinas: “Those things must properly be called miraculous which are done by divine power apart from the order generally followed in things”

O Evans: “[Miracles] have a function and purpose, and usually that function is a revelatory one”

Defining MiraclesO There are various definitions of

Miracles. What is important to note is how these definitions differ and when to use them. For example, if given a statement on Miracles needing to break the laws of nature, bring in Holland to show some disagreement with that statement.

Defining MiracleO Dictionary

O A surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is considered to be divine.

O Most Religious BelieversO A miracle is something extraordinary which has been brought

about by God for a particular purpose.O MacQuarrie

O “A miracle is an event that excites wonder and that God is in the event in some special way.”

O Holland

O Miracles don’t have to break the laws of nature. It could happen for an empirical reason, but one might interpret it as a miracle (because they aren’t privy to all the information) Child on the railway example

Definitions continuedO Evans

O “[Miracles] have a function and purpose, and usually that function is a revelatory one”

O AquinasO A miracle needs to have a cause which is “absolutely hidden”O An event done by God which nature could NEVER do (at least

in that order, or breaks the rules of nature)O Hume

O A transgression of the la w of nature by a particular volition of the deity

O SwinburneO A miracle is a nonrepeatable counter-instance to a law of

nature

Firstly – What are the Laws of Nature

O Our current formulation of our beliefs in the way the universe appears to behave, is not necessarily equivalent to either how the universe actually is, or how the universe has to be

O The laws of nature is a generalisation based no regular happenings within nature

O Things in nature that are necessarily true i.e. Laws of Physics

For HumeO Miracles are not impossible.

However, His argument concludes that we would have to regard any report of them as incredible

O Hume criticised Miracles, though. He was an empiricist and while he said that miracles are not impossible, it is quite impossible to prove them

Hume on Miracles (HANDOUT)

O 1) The “Sensible Person”O 2) Favouring the OddsO 3) The DeceptionO 4) The Normal World problemO 5) The Ignorant and barbarous

problemO 6) Looking for the marvelousO 7) The Religion Contradictions

Criticisms to Hume (HANDOUT)

O 1) Definition of “Miracle” Criticized2) Necessary Modifications3) Revelatory Purpose Missed4) Myth of the biblical miracle still = meaning5) Rash conclusions based on reports6) Empirical evidence is possible7) Just because it is “highly unlikely” doesn’t mean that it is absolutely impossible8) Different belief systems with different miracles

Note for Hume…O The testimony argument

O “[n]o 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 endeavours to establish.’

O The more believable explanation of a miracle is the correct one. I.e. A “miracle” should not automatically be an act of God, it can still be scientifically explained.

Lourdes exampleO ‘On 13th October 1917, there were more than 70,000 people gathered in the Cova da

Iria in Fatima, Portugal. They had come to observe a miracle which had been foretold by the Blessed Virgin [Mary, mother of Jesus] to three young visionaries; Lucia dos Santos and her two cousins Jacinta and Francisco Marto. Shortly after noon, Our Lady appeared to the three visionaries. As the lady was about to leave, she pointed to the sun. Lucy excitedly repeated the gesture and the people looked into the sky…Then a gasp of terror rose from the crowd, for the sun seemed to tear itself from the heavens and come crashing down on the horrified multitude…Just when it seemed that the ball of fire would fall upon and destroy them, the miracle ceased, and the sun resumed its normal place in the sky, shining forth as peacefully as ever.’

O 1) A mass hallucination involving 70,000 people. 70,000 people all telling a lie. The invention of the whole occurrence. This is the falsehood of the testimony.

O 2) The sun moving about in the sky: this would entail two things: that the sun can move and the solar system does not fall apart and that the sun can move for 70,000 people, but not for the other millions in the Northern Hemisphere enjoying sunshine at the same time: why didn’t they see it too? This is the testimony of the miracle.

Which of the two is more likely to occur? Richard Dawkins felt that the second one is more miraculous because it defies laws of physics, and there is still the option of 70,000 all being tricked or lying. Thus, the miracle did not happen.

For WilesO “The world as a whole [is] a single act of

God.”O God is the sole creator of the universe, but

does not intervene with it. O Even if God did miracles, understood as

interventions, they would be rare and should not be relatively arbitrary or trivialO However, because God does not stop other

terrible things from happening and only “fixes” certain things, this is most likely an arbitrary God unworthy of worship

Wiles on MiraclesO Even if “miracles” were such an act of God, given

that God appears not to have been concerned enough to stop major atrocities, miracles as reported infer a strange and debased idea of God. Thus, this God should not worthy of worship!

O Felt that miracles were “damaging” to a faith, mainly because you would have to explain why God chooses to help some and allow others to suffer…

O The Problem of EvilO If God could perform miracles, even arbitrarily, God is

unable to maintain the stable structures of creation (And if he is able to maintain structure, then why not do more to alleviate suffering?

Wiles on Miracles continued

O “There are no good grounds for speaking of particular divine actions with respect to particular phenomena”

O Miracles are much too subjective in terms of defining it.

O “..it would be strange that no miraculous intervention prevented Auschwitz or Hiroshima, while the purposes apparently forwarded by some of the miracles acclaimed in traditional Christian faith seem trivial by comparison.”

Simply put, trying to attach reason to the act of any divine action seems tough to do

Responses to WilesO For his Problem of Evil argument

O Theodicies (Irenaeus and Augustine)O God’s actions are way beyond our

understandingO For his inability to rationalise miracles

O God could still be perfectly knowledgeable within the limits of time and space, which does not limit his power or his purpose

O Polkinghorne: Miracles might not always be able to be explained, but it is at times perfectly understood by members and believers of the faith

Swinburne on MiraclesO A miracle is a nonrepeatable counter-

instance to a law of natureO It is reasonable to believe in miracles if

all past experiences of natural law goes against an event

O Miracles are events which seem to have a deeper significance than the events themselves – meaning that an arbitrary god performing “miracles” would simply be a god performing random acts

Swinburne continuedO The fact that God is the cause of the

extraordinary event is strengthened if the event occurs in answer to a prayer and if it is an act consistent with the Nature of God.

O In regards to the law of nature… to salvage the law of nature requires too many ad hoc adjustments.

O It is rational to believe that a miracle has occurred, while allowing the possibility that evidence might turn up later to show that we were “mistaken”(Hume would say that “miracles” could eventually be proven wrong)

Vardy on MiraclesO One’s belief in miracles depends on a) your view of God

being temporal or sempiternal and b) whether you are a realist or an anti-realist

O Vardy speaks on Miracles and directly critiques Hume with the following:O Laws of nature are not set in stoneO Modern science has considered the Laws of Nature

probabilistic (99 times out of 100, but there is still an exception to a rule)

O Hume only dealt with reports, as opposed to miracles that someone actually experienced

O Modern miracles are often backed up by scientific enquiry (whereas, when Hume was writing, they were largely based on testimony only)

O Religious traditions never claimed that miracles should be the sole reasons for belief

Problem of Evil and Miracles

Two Big QuestionsWhat are the implications of the concept of Miracle for the Problem of Evil?

What links and connections are there between Miracles and the Problem of Evil?

Problem of Evil and Miracles

O The “Problem of Evil” was first formulated by Epicurus (342-270 BC) O “Either God cannot abolish evil, or He will not; if He

cannot then He is not all-powerful; if He will not then He is not all-good

O Thus, a Good God would eliminate evil and being all powerful, he should. God has the means (power) and the motivation (love, goodness) to eliminate evil.

O God is omnipotent. God is all-good. God opposes evil. Therefore evil does not exist in the world.

Whether you believe it does or does not is another question. A good way to address this is to look at the Theodicies of Irenaeus and Augustine.

P of E continuedO Two main types of EvilO Moral: Arise from the responsible actions

of groups and individuals who cause suffering or harm. They include such things as stealing, lying, and envy, as well as the evils of some political systems.

O Natural: Arise from events which cause suffering but over which human being have little control, for example, earthquakes and disease.

P of Evil continuedO When addressing questions about

Miracles and the Problem of Evil, you need to develop various attributesO Why is God’s Omnipotence important

in the conversation of miracles?O Why is God’s Omnibenevolence

important in the conversation of miracles?

O Why is God’s Omnipresence important in the conversation of miracles?