3EF: Miracles

Question 1

What is the actual definition of a miracle?

Answer 1

The unexpected and unusual manifestations of the presence and power of God

Question 2

Could the Nebraska church explosion be considered a miracle?

Answer 2

Yes, because the chances are so slim and it was an unexpected event with a positive outcome

Question 3

Could Jesus’ resurrection be considered a miracle?

Answer 3

Yes, if you are a fundamentalist

Question 4

Could Fabrice’s Muambas survival of a heart attack be considered a miracle?

Answer 4

Yes because he was declared dead

Question 5

Could the Hindu milk phenomenon be considered a miracle?

Answer 5

Yes, because it impossible for a statue to drink milk

Question 6

Evidence from sacred writings to explain why religious people accept miracles

Answer 6

• religions often document supernatural events to support credibility (eg parting of the Red Sea)
• Becker: miracles cannot be the object of historical investigation because miracles claim to involved supernatural beings
• Buddhism: non-theistic so reject the idea of miracles as a sign of God
• Islam: accepts supernatural although Muhammed refused to perform miracles to strengthen authors - many muslims believe the only miracle is the production of the Qu’ran

Question 7

Evidence from personal experience to explain why religious people accept miracles

Answer 7

• healing miracles at Lourdes: 1989 Danila Castelli “unexplained according to current scientific knowledge”
• At Lourdes they pray for God’s intervention
• Religious believers see miracles see miracles as events that can happen in the present: God is active within his creation and works within the world to answer prayers

Question 8

Evidence from affirmation of faith traditions to explain why religious people accept miracles

Answer 8

• miracles confirm the authority of claims of a particular faith tradition
• if God desired to communicate then miracles would be explained: eg Muhammed splitting the moon in two at Mecca
• many Christians argue the resurrection confirms Jesus is the Son of God and Christianity is the one true revelation
• miracles can be essential to the actual revelation
• some religious believers argue there is no reason why God shouldn’t work

Question 9

What did Aquinas define a miracle as?

Answer 9

something that goes beyond the order usually observed in the laws of nature: “Those things […] which are done by divine power apart (different) from the order generally followed in things”

Question 10

What are the 3 general events Aquinas interpreted as miracles?

Answer 10

1. Events done by God which nature could never do: goes against the law of nature completely ie in Joshua 10 when the sun and moon were made to stand still so Joshua could have enough light to return to camp
2. Events in which God does something nature can do, but not in this order: events within the laws of nature but in reverse order ie life after death, Lazarus
3. Events usually done by the working of nature, but without the normal principles of nature: our bodies can heal ourselves but it is a slow process, a miracle occurs when this is done in a shorter time span

Question 11

What did Hume define a miracle as?

Answer 11

“a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity”

Question 12

What does Hume think the main feature of a miracle should be?

Answer 12

it breaks the law of nature, therefore anything that doesn’t break the laws of nature cannot be considered a miracle (eg childbirth cannot be considered a miracle because it just follows the laws of nature)

Question 13

What does Holland define a miracle as?

Answer 13

“a remarkable and beneficial coincidence that is interpreted in a religious fashion”. The ‘contingency definition’ - depends of interpretation

Question 14

How does Holland response to Humes claims?

Answer 14

He agreed with Hume that if there were several reasonable witnesses then the law of nature would have to be revised/falsified as non existence. However he says this would not be an easy thing to do so it is better to see miracles as coincidences

Question 15

What example does Holland use to prove his point?

Answer 15

A child riding a toy motorcar, one of his wheels gets stuck down the side of a railway track and a train is bearing down on him. The driver will not have enough time to stop the train by the time he sees the boy. Somehow, the train comes to a halt just in front of the boy - the driver has fainted some distance back and fell on the brake.
- Holland sees this as a miracle because there is no hand of God; rather the onus is clearly on the interpretation of the person

Question 16

What does Swinburne define a miracle as?

Answer 16

“Natural laws may be broken but there has to be religious significance for the event to be a miracle” - the miracle must be also seen as a sign from God: the miracle points to something beyond the actual event

Question 17

Quote from Swinburne about if God intervened

Answer 17

“If God intervened in the natural order to make a feather land here rather than […] it would not naturally be described as a miracle”

Question 18

Which scholars’ definition of miracles would the Nebraska church explosion fit?

Answer 18

Holland

Question 19

Which scholars’ definition of miracles would the Lourdes healing fit?

Answer 19

• Aquinas (3rd type)
• Hume
• Swinburne

Question 20

Which scholars’ definition of miracles would Jesus’ resurrection fit?

Answer 20

• Aquinas (2nd type)
• Hume
• Swinburne

Question 21

Which scholars’ definition of miracles would the water to wine fit?

Answer 21

• Aquinas (1st type)
• Hume
• Swinburne (confirms sacrament of marriage)

Question 22

Which scholars’ definition of miracles would Fabrice Muamba’s heart attack fit?

Answer 22

• Swinburne

Question 23

Which scholars’ definition of miracles would the Hindu milk miracle fit?

Answer 23

• Aquinas (1st type)
• Hume
• Swinburne
• Holland

Question 24

Which scholars agree that a miracle involves a breaking of a law of nature?

Answer 24

Aquinas, Hume, Swinburne

Question 25

Which scholars agree that a miracle involves intervention of God?

Answer 25

Aquinas, Hume, Swinburne

Question 26

Which scholars agree that a miracle has religious significance?

Answer 26

Holland and Swinburne

Question 27

Reasons to suggest the different definitions of miracles are adequate

Answer 27

• Holland; the interpretation of an ordinary event - if a person interprets the event as a miracle the event can be called a miracle
• It is adequate to say that a miracle is a break in the law of nature as the law is the best explanation we have for the way the world has worked up until now. The law is so well established that a break of it would be extraordinary. For it to break is simply not the same as saying my hypothesis may simply change.
• Surely it is adequate to say that God or gods must be involved? The whole idea of a miracle is that it is due to something extraordinary which has ‘intruded’ into the world of regularity. In order for this to happen there must be a God or gods who have the power to overcome regularity to perform this act.
• The whole point of a miracle may be that an intervention is required. If there is no ‘breaking into the world’ then it is not worthy of being called miraculous. Also, it is an adequate part of the definition because the reasons behind God’s intervention are known by God. So there is an overall plan. An analogy is often used where there is a shoal of fish being washed up to shore. A small child has a very small bucket. She rushes over to the edge of the water to scoop up some of the fish into her bucket in order to place them back into the water. An onlooker says ‘why are you bothering, you will never save them all’ to which the reply came ‘it’s worth it as I can save some of them’. So God’s pointed intervention to perform some miracles is better than performing none.

Question 28

Reasons to suggest the different definitions of miracles are inadequate

Answer 28

• there may have been a supernatural intervention but not a break of a law of nature
• it would be impossible to know if God had acted or not since all events could be explained without recourse to God
• Hume’s description seems to imply that God is going against his own laws; if this God was omniscient then he would have foreseen the consequences of the laws and nature and possibly extended them to allow ‘miraculous’ events to happen (it also presents God as an interventionist)
• Swinburne’s definition suggest a God who is out of time and not clear what that means
• It is not adequate to say that a God or gods must be involved in our definition. Many do not believe in God, so are they not allowed to have a definition without a God?

Question 29

Reasons to suggest that different definitions of miracles can be considered contradictory

Answer 29

• Hume and Swinburne see God as an interventionist who breaks the laws of nature, whereas Holland sees natural courses of events and amazing coincidences
• Hume does not consider the issue or the purpose of miracles in his definition: means that miracles aren’t linked with some ‘sign’ from God

Question 30

Reasons to suggest that different definitions of miracles cannot be considered contradictory

Answer 30

• they could be describing different types of miracles
• Aquinas’ definition supports divine agency but does not couch it in terms of breaking a law of nature due to scientific understandings of the time
• they could merely be focusing on different aspects and acknowledging two different types of events that can be called miracles