CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS

The College of Biblical Studies

Lecture 6: If God Exists, then Miracles are Possible!

Consider how would you define miracles?

______.

Give an argument for the reality of miracles? ______.

We are going to examine the case for miracles by examining (1) what a miracle is; (2) summarize three major arguments against miracles by “naturalists”; (3) give an argument for miracles; (4) and lastly, ask ourselves how we should then live in light of miracles.

The importance of this lecture is realized in the following statement:

If miracles have no evidential value, then there is no objective, historical evidence to support the claims of historic, orthodox Christianity (e.g., Jesus Christ historically and factually rose bodily from the grave).

MIRACLES![1]

  1. Truth about reality is knowable.
  2. The opposite of true is false.
  3. God exists.
  4. If God exists, then miracles are possible.

1. WHAT IS A MIRACLE?

A.Atheist (now theist)Antony Flew once stated: “A miracle is something which would never have happened had nature, as it were, been left to its own devises.”[2]

B.Atheist David Hume: “Now a miracle is a violation of the laws of nature. Yet these laws of nature are themselves established by firm and unalterable experience, so a miracle goes against the very evidence by which we determine matters of fact. Thus we conclude that no human testimony is sufficient to establish the occurrence of a miracle unless the testimony is of such a kind that its being false would be more miraculous than the fact which it seeks to establish.

C.Definitions:A miracle may simply be defined as a special act of God that interrupts the natural course of events; “miracle is an event so unique or unusual, that, given all the circumstances, the best explanation is that God intervened directly.” ~ Winfried Corduan.

2.ARGUMENTS AGAINST MIRACLES:

There are three major arguments made against miracles: (A) Improbability; (B) Violation of Natural Law; (C) Lack of Identifiability:

  1. Improbability (David Hume, 1711-1776):[3]
  1. All knowledge is to some extent a matter of probability:
  2. The Knowledge with the highest probability is knowledge of the laws of nature.
  3. For any alleged miracle, it is more probable that the supposed witnesses were mistaken than that the laws of nature were violated.

Or let’s put it another way:

1. Natural law is by definition a description of a regular occurrence.

2. A miracle is by definition a rare occurrence.

3. The evidence for the regular is always greater than that for the rare.

4. A wise man always bases his belief on the greater evidence.

5. Therefore, a wise man should never believe in miracles.[4]

B. Violation of Natural Law (Alister McKinnon):

1.A miracle is a violation of a natural law.

2.But it is impossible to violate the actual course of events (what is, is; what happens, happens).

3. Therefore, miracles are impossible.

Or, in a similar argument from the skeptic philosopher, Benedict Spinoza (1632-1677):

  1. Miracles are violations of natural laws.
  2. Natural laws are immutable.
  3. It is impossible to violate immutable laws.
  4. Therefore, miracles are impossible.[5]

C. Lack of Identifiability (Former atheist Antony Flew):

What is not identifiable has no evidential value.

1. A miracle must be identified (distinguished) before it can be known to have occurred).

2. A miracle can be distinguished in one of two ways: in terms of nature or in terms of the supernatural.

3. To identify it by reference to the supernatural as an act of God begs the question.

4. To identify it in reference to the natural event robs it of its supernatural activity.

5. Therefore, miracles cannot be known to have occurred, since there is no way to identify them.

3.ARGUMENT FOR MIRACLES:

A. Arguments for Miracles:

  1. If God exists, then miracles are possible.
  1. Combining this argument with our 12-point apologetic methodology from Geisler & Turek:

a. If a theistic God exists, then miracles are possible.

b. A miracle is a special act of God.

c. God is the source and standard of all truth; he cannot err:

d. Nor would a theistic God act to confirm something as true that was false.

e. Therefore, true miracles in connection with a message confirm that message to be from God: (a) The miracle confirms the message; (b) The sign confirms the sermon. (c) An act of God confirms the Word of God. (d) New revelation needs new confirmation.

  1. Answering Objections:

All that is needed to counter an argument is disprove a premise within the argument.

  1. Counter-Example to Hume’s Probability argument:

a. The evidence for the regular is not always greater than that for the rare:

2.Critique:

The issue is not whether an event is regular or rare-the issue is whether we have good evidence for the event; we must weigh evidence for the event in question.

C. How Can We Recognize a Miracle?

1. Remember: Not All Explanations Are Created Equal.

  1. Superseding Miracle: The event appears to defy known physical laws.
  1. The Configuration Miracle: Set of events that seem too improbable to come together on the basis of coincidence alone

4.How Should We Then Live?

A.If God exists, then miracles are possible. The arguments for God’s existence (e.g., cosmological, teleological (Intelligent Design and Anthropic Principle), and moral law arguments) give a powerful cumulative case that we live in a theistic universe. Coupled with both the historical facts of miracles regarding the person and work of Jesus Christ & the reliability of the Bible, using the same criteria for authenticating other historical records, be assured we have the best answers.

B.Be critical/comprehensivewhen considering miracle claims:

When one person looks at an event and says it is a miracle and another person looks at the same event and says it is not, who is right? Who is to say that that one is right? How can we recognize miracles on such a subjective basis?Remember, not all explanations are created equal. Thus, we want to be ever so careful in claiming what is and what is not a miracle because we don’t want to unintentionally misrepresent what has happened. At all times we want to be truthful, factual, and intellectually and emotionally honest before God.

C. Be sure to be able to discern what is and what is not a miracle:

  1. As Geisler and Turek state, “A true miracle would be an act only God could perform, meaning it would include God-like characteristics such as supernatural power, intelligent design, and the promotion of moral behavior. By these characteristics, miracles can be distinguished from other types of unusual events such as providence, satanic signs, psychosomatic cures, magic, and anomalies.”[6]
  1. Divine Miracle tends to have the following qualities:[7]

a. Actual supernatural event.

b. Under Creator’s control.

c. Never associated with the occult.

d. Connected with the true God.

e. Associated with truth.

f. Associated with goodness.

g. Involves true prophecy.

h. Glorifies God.

D. Mostmiracles are connected with a person or truth claim (prophets of God; Jesus Christ):

1. Truly supernatural.

2. Unique.

3. Multiple.

4. Predictive.

  1. How would we answer the question why biblical miracles (e.g., manna from heaven; parting of waters) don’t occur today? If the Bible is true and complete, then there is no new word from God that needs to be confirmed by God. To be sure we are not saying that God cannot do miracles today, or that He never does. Since God is the sovereign omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent Creator God of the universe, He is capable of doing a miracle anytime He wills. What we are saying is that God may not have a reason to publicly authenticate His revelation in the church age (Acts 2 to the Rapture) the way He did in biblical times because all of the truths He wanted to disclose has already been revealed and confirmed. Like a house, the foundation only needs to be laid once. The types of miracles in biblical times were special acts of God that laid the foundation for His permanent revelation to humanity. Notwithstanding, dramatic biblical miracles will occur once againfollowing the miraculous Rapture of the Church. For example, the bodily resurrection of the two witnesses in the Book of Revelation - which will be used to confirm to the whole world the divine message they were commissioned to preach.

1

“Persuading Minds, Liberating Hearts.”

[1] The material in this presentation is largely indebted to Norman Geisler, Baker’s Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999); ibid., and Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be An Atheist (Wheaton: Crossway, 2004), 197-217; Winfried Corduan, “Miracles: Liability and Asset” in

[2]Antony Flew, “Miracles,” in The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Paul Edwards (New York: Macmillan, 1967), 5: 346.

[3]David Hume, An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merril, Library of Liberal Arts, 1955), 117-41. David Hume’s argument against miracles had a powerful impact on Western thought. In fact, it was a foundational element for the Enlightenment worldview whereby secular humanists declared abandonment of faith in a supernatural God, relegating it to false superstitions, primitive beliefs in favor of faith in reason and the scientific method. In fact, this case against miracles worked well in advancing naturalistic evolution because of the belief that God does not exist.

[4] Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be An Atheist (Wheaton: Crossway, 2004), 205-6.

[5] Ibid., 204.

[6] Ibid., 217.

[7] Ibid., 214.