MIRACLES WHAT ARE THEY?

Theologians have responded by redefining miracles.   The debate about miracles has been centered on the definition of a miracle. Philosophers have used the definition of a miracle to argue that miracles do not happen. Theologians have responded by redefining miracles.

DEFINITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT FORWARD DAVID HUME: “A miracle is the transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the deity or by the inter-position of some invisible agent.” RICHARD SWINEBURNE: “A miracle is a violation of the law of nature by a god, that is, a very powerful rational being who is not a material object.”

JOHN MACKIE “A miracle is a violation of the law of nature brought about by divine or supernatural intervention.” Laws of nature are the ways in which the world and of course, human beings act when left to itself, when not interfered with. A miracle occurs when the world is not left to itself; when something distinct from the natural order as a whole intrudes into it.

There are three kinds of miracles. SAINT THOMAS AQUINAS “Miracles are works that are done by divine power apart from the order generally followed in things”. There are three kinds of miracles. 1. Events in which something is done by God which nature could never do (the sun standing still, the sun rising from the west).

2. Events in which God does something which nature can do but not in this order (living after death, the blind seeing again). 3. Events which occur when God does what is usually done by the working of nature but without the operation of the principle of nature. (someone being cured from a disease which doctors could have cured with time). R. F. HOLLAND: A miracle is any extra-ordinary coincidence of a beneficial nature interpreted religiously. E.g. Survival of one or two people in an accident.

PHILOSOPHERS’ ARGUMENTS 1. To say that God intervenes shows that God was not there in the first place but believers assert that God is omnipresent. 2. According to John Mackie, to say that the world is left to itself does not make any sense. Christians claim that the world is always conceived in being by God. God sustains the world all the time.

THEOLOGIANS’ RESPONSE 1. According to Samuel M THEOLOGIANS’ RESPONSE 1. According to Samuel M. Thompson, the notion of miracle as something that happens in nature and is contrary to the law of nature is a curiously confused concept. (a) It is not biblical. (b) A miracle is a marvel, an event which evokes wonder and awe. (c) According to R. H. Fuller the bible knows nothing about the laws of nature as a closed system.

2. The above definitions lack what believers consider to be the most important element of a miracle. Believers assert that miracles are events of religious significance. They reveal something about God or some truth about religion. Not just any purported violation of a law of nature can be considered a miracle.

DAVID HUME ON MIRACLES MIRACLES DON’T HAPPEN

REASONS 1. No reported miracle comes with the testimony of enough people who can be regarded as sufficiently intelligent, learned, reputable, e.t.c, to justify us in believing in such a miracle. 2. People are naturally prone to look for wonders and marvels and because of that we must be skeptical of reported miracles.

3. Religious people are particularly untrustworthy and are subject to vanity and self-interest. 4. Miracles are found among ignorant, barbarous nations. 5. Different religions testify different miracles and because of that these miracles cancel out each other. If miracles happen there should be uniformity.

CRITIQUE ON HUME 1. How many people constitute a sufficient number of witnesses? Who gives that number? What authority does that person have? 2. How much learned should the witnesses be: University professors? Doctors? Hume does not explain all this and because of that his argument is invalid.

3. It is not true that all the reported miracles have been reported inaccurately. 4. It is not true that all the religious people are always swayed by the need of the wonderful. 5. It is not true to say that religious people are untrustworthy. According to Brian Davies it is premature for Hume to argue that we can always disregard the testimony about miracles.

THE WAY FORWARD BY THEOLOGIANS Biblical theologians have resorted to the meanings of the Greek words for miracle that are used in the New Testament. 1. Dunamis: powerful deeds 2. Semeia: signs 3. Thaumata: marvels 4. Terata: wonders 5. Paradoksa: unbelievable events, exciting surprise fear 6. Ergon: dead/ work

Theologians have redefined miracles in the light of these Greek words. Miracles are powerful actions revealing God’s power. They point to the greatness of God. They herald God’s kingdom. In LUKE 11:20 Jesus argued that if it was by the finger of the devil that he cast out evil spirits, then the kingdom of God had arrived.

In miracles God’s power was witnessed. Those with faith see miracles and those without faith do not see them. In the NT miracles were used to reveal two basic things: the present and the eschatological reality of the kingdom of God

In the gospel of John miracles have a different outlook In the gospel of John miracles have a different outlook. For him they are signs or symbols. A sign is not an end in itself but points to something. Some scholars have argued that John’s terminology is the most appropriate. There is no talk of miracles as violations of the laws of nature. That definition of miracle has been imposed by philosophers.