Religious Studies 37 (1):33-58 (2001)
In this paper, I argue that miracles should not be defined as involving violations of natural laws. They should be defined as signs of particular volitions of the deity or of other supernatural agents. I suggest that one may, without any prior belief in the existence of such supernatural agents, reasonably come to believe that one has witnessed miracles.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Divine Eternity.T. J. Mawson - 2008 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 64 (1):35-50.
It’s a Miracle: Separating the Miraculous From the Mundane.Michael R. Ransom & Mark D. Alicke - 2012 - Archive for the Psychology of Religion 34 (2):243-275.
Similar books and articles
Dispositional Essentialism and the Possibility of a Law-Abiding Miracle.Toby Handfield - 2001 - Philosophical Quarterly 51 (205):484-494.
A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'.Chris Slupik - 1995 - Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
Kierkegaard's Tangential Interest in Miracles.Jyrki Kivelä - 2006 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 8:115-119.
Supernatural Miracles and Religious Inclusiveness.Morgan Luck - 2007 - Sophia 46 (3):287 - 293.
Mackie's Treatment of Miracles.Richard Otte - 1996 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 39 (3):151-158.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads198 ( #20,289 of 2,153,589 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #225,089 of 2,153,589 )
How can I increase my downloads?