What is Hume’s point on his essay Of Miracles?
“A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined. Why is it more than probable, that all men must die; that lead cannot, of itself, remain suspended in the air; that fire consumes wood, and is extinguished by water; unless it be, that these events are found agreeable to the laws of nature, and there is required a violation of these laws, or in other words, a miracle to prevent them?”
He has a pretty straightforward answer. In fewer words, he would say that “A miracle, by nature, would break the law of nature”. I personally don’t think the law-writer would disregard the law he has set in stone. God has a standard.
I think Hume has the wrong idea of a “Law of Nature”. Take into consideration the Law of Gravity, and Newton. When an apple’s stem snaps, it will fall from the tree to the ground. It happens every time! It will never break and float away. It will always plunge downward.
Newton proposed that every object in motion would stay in motion, unless acted on by an outside force (whether that be friction, air resistance, or—for the apple—the ground). The Laws of Nature are nothing more than a sort of predictor. “This is how it will happen, under normal circumstances, outside of outside play.” It is an experiment. This is a logical argument, but who is to say that a hand cannot reach out and catch the apple before it plops on the ground? Would that break the Law of Gravity? No! Because the hand acts as an outside force!
Why cannot God be treated in the same way? Is He not just an outside force acting in on His creation? In every miracle He hasn’t broken his Law or added to it but has acted as an outside force the entire time. From the water transforming to wine, he had total dominion over the molecular structure of both liquids, and from the raising of the dead, he had perfect power over the deceased and the living. The ultimate miracle and picture of how God acts in accordance with his law as an outside force is how He sent his Son to live the life we were supposed to, die the death we should have, and give us the new life of His resurrection that we did not deserve. How does this work in accordance to the Law? Instead of re-writing the covenant, Jesus made a new way to access the Father, holding out his hand, grasping and taking on the punishment of the Law so it would not crush us, in order that we might live with Him forever.
And Hume had earlier said on page 108 that “A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence.” Well, there’s your evidence, Mr. Hume. Plain and clear.
-Luke Killam
I commented on Clabo and Madison
“A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined. Why is it more than probable, that all men must die; that lead cannot, of itself, remain suspended in the air; that fire consumes wood, and is extinguished by water; unless it be, that these events are found agreeable to the laws of nature, and there is required a violation of these laws, or in other words, a miracle to prevent them?”
He has a pretty straightforward answer. In fewer words, he would say that “A miracle, by nature, would break the law of nature”. I personally don’t think the law-writer would disregard the law he has set in stone. God has a standard.
I think Hume has the wrong idea of a “Law of Nature”. Take into consideration the Law of Gravity, and Newton. When an apple’s stem snaps, it will fall from the tree to the ground. It happens every time! It will never break and float away. It will always plunge downward.
Newton proposed that every object in motion would stay in motion, unless acted on by an outside force (whether that be friction, air resistance, or—for the apple—the ground). The Laws of Nature are nothing more than a sort of predictor. “This is how it will happen, under normal circumstances, outside of outside play.” It is an experiment. This is a logical argument, but who is to say that a hand cannot reach out and catch the apple before it plops on the ground? Would that break the Law of Gravity? No! Because the hand acts as an outside force!
Why cannot God be treated in the same way? Is He not just an outside force acting in on His creation? In every miracle He hasn’t broken his Law or added to it but has acted as an outside force the entire time. From the water transforming to wine, he had total dominion over the molecular structure of both liquids, and from the raising of the dead, he had perfect power over the deceased and the living. The ultimate miracle and picture of how God acts in accordance with his law as an outside force is how He sent his Son to live the life we were supposed to, die the death we should have, and give us the new life of His resurrection that we did not deserve. How does this work in accordance to the Law? Instead of re-writing the covenant, Jesus made a new way to access the Father, holding out his hand, grasping and taking on the punishment of the Law so it would not crush us, in order that we might live with Him forever.
And Hume had earlier said on page 108 that “A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence.” Well, there’s your evidence, Mr. Hume. Plain and clear.
-Luke Killam
I commented on Clabo and Madison
Comments