Wiles’ Critique

Question 1

What did Wiles’ believe about miracles?

Answer 1

-Another significant anti-realist perspective comes from Maurice Wiles, who rejects the idea of miracles as literal interventions by God
-Wiles argues that if God were to perform specific miracles—such as curing an illness or saving someone from disaster—then God would appear arbitrary or even immoral for choosing to intervene in some situations while ignoring far greater suffering elsewhere

Question 2

What is a quote from Wiles about miracles?

Answer 2

-He claims that all events in the world occur according to natural laws, and that God’s action is better understood as sustaining creation as a whole, rather than breaking into it occasionally
-As he states, “if God can act, but does not, He is culpable; if He cannot, He is not omnipotent”
-As such, Wiles denies the historical truth of miracles like the resurrection or turning water into wine, seeing them instead as symbols of deeper theological truths
-This anti-realist stance aligns with a more liberal theological tradition that values coherence with modern science and ethics

Question 3

Why might critics argue against Wiles’ view on miracles?

Answer 3

-critics argue that this reduces miracles to mere metaphors, stripping them of the power to inspire faith or affirm divine omnipotence
-Nevertheless, Wiles offers a rational and morally consistent view of miracles, rooted in the belief that God’s role is not interventionist but continuous and universal

Question 4

How does Wiles present the problem of consistency in divine action?

Answer 4

-He argues that accepting some miracle stories—such as Jesus calming a storm or healing the blind—raises troubling theological questions about why God would choose to act in these moments but remain silent in the face of large-scale suffering, such as natural disasters or genocides
-Wiles writes that “if God’s power is to be understood as acting in the world in the way the New Testament miracles suggest, then God’s failure to act in other, more urgent situations becomes morally questionabl

Question 5

How does Wiles avoid the problem of consistency in divine action?

Answer 5

-Wiles contends that miracles must be understood non-literally, as expressions of faith and meaning rather than historical fact
-This position preserves the ethical character of God while avoiding selective divine action, but it also shifts the weight of belief away from supernatural events and toward symbolic interpretation
-For many traditional believers, this is problematic because it undermines the historical foundation of Christianity, particularly the resurrection, which is central to Christian doctrine. -Nevertheless, Wiles prioritises a consistent and morally defensible theology over literal belief in miraculous events, offering a view of God that aligns with reason, ethics, and the scientific understanding of natural law.