Faith and Philosophy 12 (1):54-78 (1995)
AbstractThose who believe that miracles (temporary suspensions of some law of nature accomplished by divine power) have occurred typically hold that they are rare and that only a small percentage of all people have been eyewitnesses to them or been direct beneficiaries of them. Although a claim that they occur far more frequently would be empirically highly implausible, I argue that the claim that God performs miracles in such a pattern unavoidably implies that God is guilty of unfairness. I articulate a criterion of fairness, discuss various types of miracles, and defend my conclusion against a variety of possible rejoinders
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
No references found.
Citations of this work
Miracles, Evidence, Evil, and God: A Twenty-Year Debate*: Dialogue.Christine Overall - 2006 - Dialogue 45 (2):355-366.
Aquinas’s Miracles and the Luciferous Defence: The Problem of the Evil/Miracle Ratio.Morgan Luck - 2009 - Sophia 48 (2):167-177.
Similar books and articles
Miracles as Violations of Laws of Nature.Martin Curd - 1996 - In Faith, Freedom, and Rationality: Philosophy of Religion Today. Rowman & Littlefield.
Divine Hiddenness: Would More Miracles Solve the Problem?Jake H. O'Connell - 2013 - Heythrop Journal 54 (2):261-267.
Prophecy, Early Modern Apologetics, and Hume's Argument Against Miracles.Peter Harrison - 1999 - Journal of the History of Ideas 60 (2):241 - 256.
A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'.Chris Slupik - 1995 - Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
Hume’s Abject Failure: The Argument Against Miracles.John Earman - 2000 - Oxford University Press.
The Theological and Philosophical Significance of the Markan Account of Miracles.Jacqueline Mariña - 1998 - Faith and Philosophy 15 (3):298-323.