Miracles

The question of miracles lies at the intersection of philosophy, theology, and science. Miracles are central to many religious traditions — Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and Hinduism all contain accounts of miraculous events. But what exactly is a miracle? Can miracles occur? Should we ever believe reports of miracles? This lesson examines the major definitions, Hume's influential attack on miracles, the philosophical responses, and the evaluation of whether miracles can function as evidence for God's existence.

---

Definitions of Miracles

Different philosophers and theologians have defined miracles in significantly different ways, and the definition adopted shapes the entire debate.

Aquinas' Definition

St Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) defined a miracle as an event brought about by God that exceeds the powers of nature. For Aquinas, a miracle is:

• Performed by God (the primary cause)
• Beyond the power of any natural agent (secondary causes)
• An event that nature cannot produce by its own powers

Aquinas distinguished three types of miracle:

1. Events that nature can never do (e.g., the sun going backward)
2. Events that nature can do, but not in this order (e.g., a person living after death)
3. Events that nature can do, but God does without natural causes (e.g., an instantaneous healing)

Hume's Definition

David Hume (1711–1776) defined a miracle as "a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent" (An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, 1748). Hume's definition emphasises that a miracle is a violation of natural law — an event that contradicts the regular, law-like order of nature as established by uniform experience.

Key Definition: Miracle (Hume) — A transgression or violation of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity. This definition frames miracles as events that contradict the established regularities of nature.

Swinburne's Definition

Richard Swinburne (b. 1934) defines a miracle as "an event brought about by the power of God which would not have happened without God's intervention" — a non-repeatable counter-instance to a law of nature. Swinburne accepts that miracles violate natural laws but argues that this does not make them impossible or incredible — it merely means they require a supernatural explanation.

Tillich's Definition

Paul Tillich (1886–1965) rejected the idea of miracles as violations of natural law. Instead, he defined a miracle as a "sign-event" — an event that points beyond itself to the ground of being, producing a sense of astonishment and revealing something about the divine. On this view, any event can be miraculous if it mediates an experience of ultimate reality — the "miracle" is in the significance of the event, not in its violation of natural law.

Philosopher	Definition	Key Feature
Aquinas	Event exceeding the powers of nature, caused by God	Focus on divine agency
Hume	Transgression of a law of nature by divine volition	Focus on violation of natural law
Swinburne	Non-repeatable counter-instance to a law of nature	Accepts violation but sees it as evidence for God
Tillich	Sign-event revealing the ground of being	Focus on significance, not violation

---

Hume's Four Arguments Against Miracles

Hume's critique of miracles (in An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X) is one of the most influential arguments in the philosophy of religion. Hume does not claim that miracles are logically impossible — rather, he argues that it is never rational to believe that a miracle has occurred.

Argument 1: The Balance of Probabilities

A miracle is, by definition, a violation of a law of nature. Laws of nature are established by uniform experience — by countless observations confirming that nature behaves in regular, predictable ways. The evidence against a miracle is therefore "as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined." The probability of a miracle occurring is vanishingly small compared to the probability that the testimony is mistaken. A "wise man proportions his belief to the evidence" — and the evidence against miracles always outweighs the evidence for them.

Argument 2: The Nature of Witnesses

Hume argued that miracle reports typically come from people who lack the education, integrity, and good sense to be reliable witnesses. They are found "chiefly among ignorant and barbarous nations" — people susceptible to superstition, wishful thinking, and credulity.

Argument 3: The Appeal of the Marvellous

Human beings are naturally drawn to the wonderful and extraordinary. We want to believe in miracles — the surprise and amazement they produce is pleasurable. This psychological tendency towards the marvellous makes us unreliable judges of miracle claims.

Argument 4: Conflicting Miracle Claims

Different religions report miracles that support incompatible theological claims. Christian miracles support Christianity; Islamic miracles support Islam; Hindu miracles support Hinduism. Since these religions make mutually exclusive claims, the miracles of one religion undermine the miracles of another. They cancel each other out, leaving no miracle claim with sufficient evidential weight.