Bringing the concept of nature into the context of miracles is problematic. David Hume, a great philosopher, defined miracles as a violation of nature's laws. Hume denoted that miracles are beyond mere changes in the course of nature. However, to bring the concept of nature when defining miracles becomes problematic. Many people preclude Hume's definition of miracles as a violation of nature. At the same time, others argue that since miracles indeed go against nature's natural law, it would not be wrong to say that miracles violate the laws of nature 1 . These arguments have drawn various debates, and that why many writers will refer to them as problems of miracles and the law of nature.
To respond to the skeptic claims that supernaturalism is incompatible with the scientific world, one needs to understand what science is. Science is seen as an application of knowledge and human understanding of nature following systematic methodologies based on evidence 2 . Therefore, the application of science brings about laws of nature. For example, gravity law is based on evidence and human knowledge that a stone automatically comes down when a stone is thrown up. Laws of nature states that a person would sink in water if placed there. All these laws of nature are based on the fact that there is evidence that when a stone is thrown up, it comes down, and one has observed people and objects sink in water. However, beyond the evidence, not much is explained of the forces involved in-depth.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Moreover, laws of nature are just set an expectation of how things should generally occur. That does not mean that this law cannot be violated 3 . Therefore, miracles come to expose that limitation of science and the law of nature.
Law of nature and miracles are compatible in that miracles go beyond human knowledge and understand, and they are influenced by a supernatural force that science cannot explain. For example, according to laws of nature, a sick person is expected to heal after an intervention; if the person still heals through an influence of a supernatural being, it is still under the scope of natural law that a sick person is expected to heal after an intervention. That can be termed as a miracle but still under but does not violate the laws of nature. However, natural laws cannot explain miracles, such as Jesus walking on water. Therefore, the two are compatible only that miracles expose the limitations of the law of nature and science.
Question: Now that the non-believers have proven that extra force is above Sciences understanding, Do you think they should dwell on trying to prove that there is no God or Miracles or try to find what exactly is the acting force?
Bibliography
Chalmers, Alan F. What Is This Thing Called Science? 2013.
Wachter, Daniel von. "Miracles Are Not Violations of the Laws of Nature Because the Laws Do Not Entail Regularity." European Journal For Philosophy of Religion , 2015.
Woodward, J. "Simplicity in the best systems account of laws of nature." The British Journal for the Philosophy , 2014.
Response to John Dahlinger
That was an interesting post, John! However, I want to respond to your challenge about the skeptics about God's goodness and protecting His people. First, look at it from the human perspective; just because someone is called good does not mean they do not respond to well they are abused or wrong by someone. Just because someone responded harshly does not mean that they seize to be good. Back to God, sometimes, he sent disasters as a form of judgment when His people have sinned a lot. Look at the case of Noah and the floods. Therefore, because the calamities are sent as a form of punishment does not mean He is no longer God. Someone may ask them if he sends disasters as a form of punishment and He is an all-powerful God, why can't he stops them even from seeing even from the first rather than destroying a large population at the end. The answer is we live in a free-will world where people are allowed to make their own choices. Therefore, every choice someone makes has consequences which you cannot choose from. Remember, when Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden of Eden, they were allowed to make their own choices, making God chases them away from the Garden against His initial plan. Instead of questioning Good goodness, the Christians should question their deeds that cause such suffering.
Response to Brian
Great post, Brain! To your question, I don't think there is a better response to non-believer skeptics since they can see the evidence on a supernatural being but continue to question supernaturalism. First, if a tornado managed to take out the entire street and leave one house standing should be enough explanation that there is a supernatural force at work that the Science and natural laws cannot explain. The non-believer focus should be on the force itself, which of God, rather than proving that He does not exist.
