Do You Believe In Miracles? (And Can You Do So Reasonably?) | W. Matthews Grant
Dec 18, 2023
auto_awesome
W. Matthews Grant, Professor and Chair in the Department of Philosophy at University of St. Thomas (MN), explores the possibility and reasonableness of believing in miracles. They discuss the definition and recognition criteria of miracles, examine arguments for and against belief, and question the probability of events such as the resurrection. The chapter challenges the claims that miracles are impossible, and explores the role of testimony in believing in highly improbable events.
Belief in miracles should not be seen as violations of the laws of nature but rather as events brought about by divine power outside of natural causes, allowing for a reconciliation between belief in miracles and belief in the reliability of natural causes.
Belief in miracles based on testimony can be rational and justified, considering factors such as the absence of conflicting evidence, the credibility of witnesses, and the details and circumstances surrounding the miraculous event.
Deep dives
Miracles are not Impossible
Miracles are not impossible, despite claims from skeptics like Richard Dawkins and theologians who argue that miracles are incompatible with science and history. Belief in miracles is still prevalent, with surveys showing that a significant majority of Americans and even doctors believe in miracles. Miracles should not be seen as violations of the laws of nature, but rather as events brought about by divine power outside of natural causes. This understanding allows for a reconciliation between belief in miracles and belief in the reliability of natural causes.
The Possibility of Belief in Miracles
There are objections to the belief in miracles that question the rationality of such belief. One argument, known as the conflict argument, claims that belief in miracles conflicts with the evidence for the laws of nature. However, this argument fails to recognize that miracles do not violate the laws of nature, as the laws only apply to natural causes and not to divine intervention. Another objection focuses on the implausibility of testimony as a basis for belief in miracles. It argues that the rarity and improbability of miracles make it more reasonable to doubt the testimony. However, this objection overlooks the fact that even improbable events can be believed based on testimonial evidence, especially when there is no reason to doubt the credibility of the witnesses.
Miracles and Belief on Testimony
The belief in miracles based on testimony, particularly regarding the resurrection of Jesus, is often questioned. Critics argue that no testimony could be sufficient to establish a miracle. However, this argument fails to consider the factors that make testimonial evidence reasonable, such as the absence of conflicting evidence and the motivation of witnesses to deceive or be deceived. Additionally, the judgment of the probability of a miraculous event depends on the details and circumstances surrounding it, including divine purpose and intention. Therefore, belief in miracles based on testimony can be rational and justified.
Supporting Belief in Miracles
In conclusion, belief in miracles is not impossible, irrational, or unjustifiable. Miracles should be understood as events brought about by divine power outside of natural causes, rather than violations of the laws of nature. Conflict arguments and objections based on the improbability of miracles and testimonial evidence are unpersuasive. Believing in miracles based on testimony can be reasonable, especially when there is no reason to doubt the credibility of the witnesses. Ultimately, the possibility and rationality of belief in miracles depend on a nuanced understanding of divine intervention and the particular circumstances surrounding each miraculous event.
W. Matthews Grant is Professor and Chair in the Department of Philosophy at University of St. Thomas (MN), and Associate Editor of the American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly. His articles have focused on Aquinas and the Philosophy of God, particularly issues having to do with the divine nature and God’s relationship to human freedom. His new book Free Will and God’s Universal Causality: The Dual Sources Account, draws resources from Aquinas and the scholastic tradition to explain how libertarian creaturely freedom can be reconciled with robust accounts of God’s providence, grace, and predestination.
Get the Snipd podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share & Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode