(a)Outline and explain the atheistic rejection of miracle.

(35)

 The atheistic rejection of miracles centres on two premises – the definition and the
existence of God.
 Atheists tend to hold with the view that a miracle would require the breaking of natural
laws, these are what is commonly known as “anti-realist” miracles and they are rejected
since the natural laws are established and verified within science. They relate to what is
commonly seen to occur within nature and thus, the breaking of such laws seems
improbable.
 Besides this, even if the laws were broken, this would show an inadequacy in the law
understood rather than justification for a miracle to be declared. What then is required as an
adjustment to previous understanding of science to accommodate this new occurrence.
 Augustine has defined miracle as “an event which cannot be forecast with our present
understanding of nature” – this would seem reasonable assertion though it could be simply
that our present understanding is inadequate – thus not necessitating that a miracle as
happened.
 Swinburne would assert that the miracle cannot merely break the laws of nature – it must
have some deeper religious significance since it is an “act of God” – we would not assume
that God would act at random and for no real purpose. For the atheist, this is problematic at
the core since for them there is no justification for belief in God never mind a deity would
interrupts nature to perform miracles.
 The idea of such a being seems nonsensical since one would naturally anticipate that
miracles would always be performed to remove suffering – however this is clearly not the
case since the world is full of suffering. This is of course the core argument of Epicurus and
Hume in the Inconsistent Triad.
 Hume is an important figure in the atheist rejection of miracle. As an empiricist, he based his
understanding of the world on his previous experiences and those gleaned by the scientific
method.
 His argument includes:
1. Miracles, since they break the laws of nature are unlikely since the laws of nature are
established over countless years of experience. For Hume, the laws of nature are static.
In this sense the logic of Oakham’s Razor can be applied – the simplest explanation is
that miracles do not occur as opposed to the laws of nature being wrong.
2. Reports of miracle are questionable since they chiefly occur among those of “ignorant
and barbarous nations.”
3. There are insufficient witnesses of good sense and reputation who claim miracle – even
the Feeding of the 5,000 can be rejected since such people had little reputation to lose,
lacked education and lived in ancient times
4. Claimants of miracle are those who relish the sensational and are prepared to set aside
the truth for the sake of a lie because of some bias or deeply held view which they wish
to perpetuate.
5. As each religious lays claim to miracle as the basis of their faiths – these competing
claims naturally cancel each other out. They are mutually exclusive – an absolute
triumph for the sceptic.
  Hick believes that the Old Testament plagues may have been perceived as a miracle by God
by the Israelites when in fact they were nothing more than a natural sequence of events. It
was not until the 17th that Newtonian understanding of cause and effect became widely
known; hence the plagues were appreciated as miracle rather mistakenly.
 Anthony Flew argues that instead of seeing an event that we may not understand and
attributing it to God, we should increase our scientific knowledge instead and find out the
complex scientific explanation for the event.
 Flew adds that miracles may not be acts of a deity but a testimony of the power of the
human mind under optimal conditions – the brain is remarkably adept at making sense of
new experiences and this might simply be its way of “imaging” in order to make sense of an
event which is new or strange. This is illustrated in the experiments conducted using
Persinger’s Helmet – it was discovered that particular parts of our brain (temporal lobe),
when stimulated in a particular way can cause us to have experiences that may have been
taken religiously – these include so called miraculous events.
 Richard Dawkins in the “Blind Watchmaker” asserts that miracles are merely coincidences –
since there are in the region of 7 billion people in the world, there are 7 billion opportunities
for coincidences perceived as miracles.
 Atkins also dismisses miracles because of their supernatural characteristics claiming that:
“science is the only route to truth.”
 We cannot prove that miracles don’t exist however it seems that they are highly unlikely
given the scientific certainties we already know and trust. Even to argue that miracles are
events which don’t have to break the laws of nature does leave open the strong atheistic
rejection saying that they are coincidences.
 Belief in miracle also distracts from the important work of making life better for humans –
why believe in a miracle when we have the field of medical research and technology to bring
forward cures and make life better. The hope for a miracle could be described as Atkins
would suggest: “intellectual laziness.” We can create our own “miracles”.

(b)OAHE, “miracles provide hope to a hurting world.” (15)

 The existence of a miracle may motivate believers to engage in worship more frequently and
intensely believing that God is more likely to listen and act. However this may be a false
hope and may even have a placebo effect on the individual – the “healing” may be
attributed to God when in fact they have believed themselves into being well – a form of
wish fulfilment.
 Waiting for a miracle may be a dangerous waste of time and opportunity – people should be
motivated into action rather than being complacent in waiting for a miracle. Such faithful
resignation could mean that their suffering is made worse since they are merely accepting it
in the hope that a miracle may come later.
 Miracles such as stigmata may strengthen not only the believer but the faith community as a
whole. However, while this might have a positive impact on that particular faith community,
another community who has not benefitted from such an experience may feel abandoned as
insufficiently faithful or failing in their Christian life in some way – this will make them
despondent and questioning.
 The resurrection is central to the Christian faith – indeed, the Apostle Paul argues: “IF Christ
has not been raised, we are dead in our sins and are deluding ourselves.” The resurrection
provides hope and certainty to the Christian Church i.e. sins are forgiven because of Jesus’
atoning death and because of this they can enjoy a new relationship with God on earth
which will be extended to a heavenly, eternal existence.
 Reports of miracles in places of pilgrimage such as Lourdes provide encouragement for those
who go there seeking physical healing and although this may not be the outcome of their
journey, they do feel spiritual benefit from simply being in the company of such a large body
of believers and enjoying the fellowship of likeminded pilgrims.
 Miracles may however be divisive – the Toronto Blessing, a phenomena reportedly
delivering healing and power by the activity of the Holy Spirit was meet with suspicion as
well as acceptance. Some even dismissed the claims as Satanic and therefore an evil force
within the church.
 The degree of suffering in the world is simply too immense to be outweighed by a few
miracles – it questions the whole character of God – why heal one individual while many
hundreds of children are left to die in hunger. If God saved the Israelites from slavery in
Egypt during the Exodus, then why not the Jews during the Holocaust?
 The existence of miracles suggests favouritism – and certainly not the sort of God therefore
who is worthy of worship.
 Miracles cannot take the place of faith ultimately – indeed Jesus rebuked the crowd who
followed him anticipating a miracle and advocated faith. "Unless you people see signs and
wonders," Jesus told him, "you will never believe." Jesus also reminds Thomas who
eventually witnesses him in his resurrected state that faith is essential – seeing is not
necessarily believing. Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who
have not seen and yet have believed’” (John 20:29).
 Some Christian scholars reject the importance of miracles alone on moral grounds since God
does not appear to act in some situations: Bonhoeffer, Wiles
 The Theologian, Bultmann rejects miracles as mythological additions to the scriptural record.
 Many would argue that in the context of scripture – the theological interpretation of miracle
is more important than the event itself and there that should be the focus for the theist – In
John’s Gospel this is particularly evident since John treats the miracles as “signs” (simea)-
they act as signposts to the truth about Jesus rather than being a focus in themselves. It
follows therefore that it more important that Jesus is the “bread of Life” than he is capable
of multiplying bread and fish to feed five thousand people. (John 6)
 Miracles are often described as uniquely religious in their effect – this would then lead to
the question of whether an atheist would ever experience a miracle.

 It is very clear that one’s perception of miracle will determine whether one sees them as a
sign of hope, a sign of God’s favouritism or meaningless and irrelevant. Appreciating and

accepting miracle largely depends on who is looking!