1. Miracles How Have Philosophers Interpreted Miracles? David HumeSwinburneM. ThompsonThomas Aquinas R. F Holland

2. St Thomas Aquinas There are 3 kinds of miracles: 1.Events done by God which nature could never do, e.g. stopping the sun (Joshua 10:13), walking on water etc A physical/natural impossibility. 2.Events done by God, which nature could do but not in that order, for example recovery from paralysis, or a terminal illness. Nature can do this but we would not expect a spontaneous remission/recovery. 3.Events done by God that nature can do, but that God did without using the forces of nature; e.g. if someone prays and as a consequence recovers from flu or a cold.

3. Mel Thompson (1996) Thompson argues that ‘the idea of a miraculous event introduces a sense of arbitrariness and unpredictability into an understanding of the world’. Thompson is suggesting we can allow for arbitrariness and unpredictability without introducing the complicated factor of miracles.

4. Richard Swinburne (1989) The laws of nature are reasonably predictable and if an apparently impossible event occurs, then it is fair to call it a miracle. He gives examples of such events from the Bible: ‘… the resurrection from the dead in full health of a man whose heart has not been beating for 24 hours; water turning into wine without the assistance of chemical apparatus; a man getting better from polio in a minute’ These events are not logical impossibilities but are remarkable for the way in which they occur, their timing or the circumstances involved, and they fulfil Aquinas’ second and third categories of a Miracle.

5. R. F Holland A miracle is nothing more than an extraordinary coincidence that is seen in a religious way ‘A coincidence can be taken religiously as a sign and called a miracle.’ Holland’s interpretation makes a miracle dependent on personal interpretation- (subjective ) and will vary from person to person.

6. David Hume Hume was an empiricist, and maintained that sense experience is the only reliable guide to reality. He proposed 4 grounds for disbelieving in miracles: 1.‘There is not to be found in all history, any miracle attested by the sufficient number of men, of such unquestioned good sense, education and learning, as to secure us against all delusion.’ 2.Hume argued that miracle stories originate from people and nations that are themselves unreliable. Miracle stories are appealing to those who love the wonderful and marvellous- a natural characteristic of mankind in general, but especially prevalent in religious people.

7. David Hume 3. Hume maintains that miracles are more likely to be reported from ‘ignorant and barbarous nations’ and therefore not reliable. 4. If all religions reported miracles apparently performed by different gods, then these claims in effect cancel each other out.