Journal of Philosophical Research 18:309-325 (1993)
AbstractThis paper critically examines the claim advanced by a number of important apologists for Christian theism that the biblical reports of miracles obtain confirmation from the accuracy of the reports of ordinary events in the biblical writings.An informal argument from analogy is first presented to show the implausibility of this claim, and then formal arguments using the theory of confirmation are considered. Several possible formal interpretations of the apologists’ position are considered and rejected.The paper concludes with several comments about the problem which miracle reports encounter with respect to challenging scientific worldviews, and makes suggestions about the kinds of strategies which would need to be employed to render such reports credible
Similar books and articles
Acts of God? Miracles and Scientific Explanation.Tor Egil Førland - 2008 - History and Theory 47 (4):483 - 494.
First-person reports and the measurement of happiness.Anna Alexandrova - 2008 - Philosophical Psychology 21 (5):571 – 583.
Canadian Corporate Social Responsibility Reports: Practitioner Responses to (Selected) Academic Ideas.Richard Hudson - 2007 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 18:162-167.
Miracles, historical testimonies, and probabilities.Aviezer Tucker - 2005 - History and Theory 44 (3):373–390.
The Theological and Philosophical Significance of the Markan Account of Miracles.Jacqueline Mariña - 1998 - Faith and Philosophy 15 (3):298-323.
Hume’s Racism and His Case against the Miraculous.Charles Taliaferro & Anders Hendrickson - 2002 - Philosophia Christi 4 (2):427 - 441.
Miracles and principles of relative likelihood.Bruce Langtry - 1985 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 18 (3):123 - 131.
Aquinas’s Miracles and the Luciferous Defence: The Problem of the Evil/Miracle Ratio.Morgan Luck - 2009 - Sophia 48 (2):167-177.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads