Journal of the History of Ideas 60 (2):241 - 256 (1999)
Hume’s "Of Miracles" concludes with the claim that prophecies, too, are miracles, and as such are susceptible to the same arguments which apply to miracles. However, both Hume and his commentators have overlooked the distinctive features of prophecy. Hume’s chief objection to miracles--that one is never justified in crediting second-hand testimony to miraculous events--does not necessarily apply to the argument from fulfilled prophecies as it was understood in the eighteenth century. Neither was prophecy necessarily thought to entail any breach of the laws of nature. Consideration of Hume’s argument in its historical context shows that it fails to counter the argument from prophecies and was known to have failed
|Keywords||C1 780199 Other 440105 History of Philosophy and History of Ideas|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument Against Miracles. [REVIEW]Peter Harrison - 2001 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 39 (4):592-594.
Hume on Miracles: Bayesian Interpretation, Multiple Testimony, and the Existence of God.Rodney D. Holder - 1998 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):49-65.
Mackie's Treatment of Miracles.Richard Otte - 1996 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 39 (3):151-158.
Bayesian Analyses of Hume's Argument Concerning Miracles.Michael Levine - 1997 - Philosophy and Theology 10 (1):101-106.
Review of Fogelin, A Defense of Hume on Miracles. [REVIEW]Richard Otte - 2004 - Hume Studies 30 (1):165-68.
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.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads36 ( #142,008 of 2,163,682 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #348,043 of 2,163,682 )
How can I increase my downloads?