3E: the definitions of miracles Flashcards
1
Q
Which four philosophers have definitions of miracles?
A
- St Thomas Aquinas
- David Hume
- Ray Holland
- Richard Swinburne
2
Q
What is Aquinas’ definition of miracles
A
- “those things … which are dine by divine power apart from the order generally followed in things”
- a miracle goes beyond the order usually observed in the laws of nature. Therefore, he is arguing that a miracle is something that alters/breaks the laws of nature
- furthered his definition by giving three different general events which could be interpreted as a miracle:
+ events done by God which nature could never do: an event that completely goes against the laws of nature, e.g. Joshua 10, where God makes the sun and moon stand still
+ events in which God does something which nature can do, but not in this order, e.g. Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead in John 11
+ events usually done by the working of nature, but without the normal principles of nature
3
Q
What is Hume’s deifntion of miracles?
A
- “a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity”
- most common definition of a miracle, the miracle is God breaking his own laws of nature
- the main feature of a miracle should be that it breaks the laws of nature; anything that does not break laws of nature cannot be considered a miracle
- Hume is a atheist: therefore only wrote this definition to eventually destroy it
4
Q
What is Holland’s definition of miracles?
A
- “a remarkable and beneficial coincidence that is interpreted in a religious fashion”
- argues that a miracle is no more than a happy coincidence. Therefore, he doesn’t see it as the breaking of the laws of the nature of God, but rather as a happy coincidence
- illustrates this using his famous train illustration. Child is riding toy train when wheels get stuck on railway line. A train is coming and wouldn’t have enough time to stop the train upon seeing the boy. However train comes to a halt just before the boy. However this is because the driver had fainted earlier on and had pressed the emergency break in the process
- there is no hand of God in incidence, it is just happy coincidence
5
Q
What is Swinburne’s definition of miracles?
A
- “natural laws may be broken but there has to be a religious significance for the event to be a miracle”
- accepts a miracle is the breaking of laws of nature by God. However it must also have a deeper meaning, i.e. the event must also point to something beyond the actual event
- even if Gd did intervene in the laws of nature it would not be sufficient enough to call it a miracle if there was no religious significance
- e.g. Fabrice Muamba who suffered cardiac arrest whilst playing football. The story went worldwide with many footballers supporting him and millions following his recovery. This miracle had a lot of significance as it showed millions the power of God
6
Q
Why may religious believers accept miracles?
A
- evidence from sacred writings
- affirmation with faith traditions
- personal testimony - Lourdes
- theological support: CS Lewis
7
Q
Evidence from sacred writings:
A
- there are so many reported incidents of miracle in the Bible, Quran etc, and therefore for some believers this is enough evidence that miracles occur
- e.g. the Bible is the word of God and if the Bible says miracles then this is a sound justification for believing them
- Bible is quite clear that miracles do happen. If we want to disagree with miracles you have to abandon the idea that the Bible is divinely inspired source of truth
- furthermore the idea of miracles is fundamental to Christian and Islamic faith. If we take out the notion of miracles we remove almost all of the central elements to religions, e.g. the miracle of the resurrection of Jesus is the most fundamental part of Christianity.
8
Q
affirmation with faith traditions:
A
- miracles can act as an affirmation of a particular faith for believers
- e.g. in Islam God performed a miracle at the hand of the Prophet Muhammed. God split the moon into two separate halves and then re-joined them.
- if the event hadn’t occurred many Muslims could have doubted their religion, and many would have left it. As a result of the miracle the believers grew stronger in faith
9
Q
personal testimony - Lourdes:
A
- Lourdes: as of 2018 there were 70 carefully attested claims that miracles had occurred.
- 1858 was first miracle of Bernadette. Thereafter Lourdes became one of the world’s most important sites of pilgrimage
- each of the 70 miracles has been carefully sited, researched and documented by an independent team of qualified doctors. The doctors were unbiased due to being a mix of both religious and non-religious scientists - plus they had no reputation to gain as they had to remain confidential
- if they argue the evidence is incontrovertible then miracles must occur
10
Q
theological support - CS Lewis:
A
- Lewis argued that miracles occur but they do not break the laws of nature.
- he argues that God is an interactive God that continues to introduce new laws of nature
- a miracle is no more than God interacting with this world by introducing new laws of nature.
- God only does these ‘miracles’ to remind us of His omnipotent nature as the creator of all laws of nature
11
Q
What are reasons why religous believers shouldn’t accept miracles?
A
- definitions of miracles are outdated (Bultmann)
- natural laws cannot be broken (Alistair McKinnon)
12
Q
Definitions of miracles are outdated:
A
- definition of a miracle is outdated
- Rudolph Bultmann suggests the mythological view of the world found in the Bible is no longer acceptable in 20+21st centuries
- we can no longer believe that miracles happen(ed) and should work at demythologising of the Old and New Testaments
- however Bultmann believed we should keep essential truths of the Bible (e.g. love and forgiveness) but the miracle stories get in the way of faith for the modern, scientifically minded thinker
13
Q
Natural laws cannot be broken:
A
- miracles are a contradiction and cannot be defined as breaking the laws of nature as breaking these laws of nature is impossible; the laws of nature would simply be redefined to take into account the new event
