50 Key Concepts in Theology

Miracles
Things done by God that break the known laws of nature.
The word ‘miracle’ derives from the Latin miraculum, meaning
‘something wonderful’. In the religious sense, a miracle is an act of divine
intervention. Belief in miracles has been an important part of Christian
theology since the earliest times. Jesus’ miracles were evidence of his divine
status and the miracles of the apostles were evidence of their authority. The
Roman Catholic Church still regards miracles as evidence of sainthood.
In the modern period, however, the question of whether miracles are
possible has been bitterly disputed, with liberal theologians abandoning all
sense of a supernatural religion. David Hume’s devastating attack on miracles
in his essay ‘Of Miracles’ has attained an iconic status in modern philosophy.
Hume’s critique became symbolic of the entire Enlightenment rejection of
religion. By challenging the reality of miracles, Hume was aiming to
challenge the credibility of any kind of supernatural activity or existence.
Hume says that his argument against miracles will be ‘an everlasting check to
all kinds of superstitious delusion’. The rejection of miracles implied the
rejection of everything supernatural, all revelation and all prophecy. Hume
said that without belief in miracles, it was unreasonable to have faith in the
Christian religion.
The question of miracles was the subject of much debate in the early
eighteenth century, and Hume’s essay emerged in the midst of these
controversies. The debate began with the Deists, who believed that God had
established the world as a well-ordered system with rational laws. It would be
irrational for God to intervene to change his own divine plan: a miracle would
be an admission by God that his general laws had been inadequate, and God
cannot logically be inadequate. The Deists also argued that the word ‘miracle’
is merely a label used for any strange thing that has not yet been explained by
science.
The Deist case is appealing, but it depends upon the presumption that the
world really is a machine operating according to regular laws that we can
fully understand. Miracles could simply be unusual instances of God’s
activity which follow a rationality we cannot understand.
Hume’s argument against miracles was simple and effective, and ran like
this: We only know about the miracles in Scripture from the testimony of
others. But it is only reasonable to accept the testimony of others as true,
when it fits with our own experience. Since we have no experience of walking

---

on water, or resurrections, it is not reasonable to take the testimony of others
on these matters as true.
Critics of Hume say that his argument depends upon the improbability of
miracles. If miracles are improbable, then it is not reasonable to give credence
to reports of miracles. However, the occasional occurrence of the improbable
is probable. It may be improbable that I will win the national lottery three
times in a row, but it is possible. Walking on water may be even more
improbable, but it cannot be ruled out altogether. Hume’s argument shows
that belief in miracles is unreasonable, but it does not show that miracles
themselves are impossible.
Hume’s concluding point is that belief in miracles must be an act of faith
rather than reason. This is surely correct. Even if we accept the testimony of
someone who claims to have seen a vision of the Virgin Mary, it requires an
act of faith to believe that this vision was given by God.
Very few people now truly believe in the power of miracles. Sick people
take themselves to the doctor and only start praying in desperation for
miracles when science has failed. Anyone who truly believed in God’s power
to intervene would presumably start praying straight away and save their bus
fare to the hospital.
THINKERS
Elizabeth Anscombe (1919–2001), in a public lecture, demolished C. S.
Lewis’ argument that miracles prove the existence of God. Lewis was,
allegedly, deeply humiliated by the experience.
St Augustine (354–430) argued in The City of God that miracles do not
violate the laws of nature, but only our understanding of nature. God makes
miracles possible within nature, but his purposes are too hidden for us to
understand.
Samuel Clarke (1675–1729) argued against the Deists in