Miracles and the Modern Mind: A Defense of Biblical Miracles

by Norman L. Geisler

That miracles exist is an important part of the Christian tradition, yet a brief survey of modern thought reveals a marked prejudice against this notion. Here, Geisler shows how the laws of logic and science speak to the reasonableness of miracles. A dispassionate look at the facts and arguments demands that doubters question their own naturalistic assumptions. Geisler also describes signs, wonders, and power, contrasting what the Bible means by a miracle with bizarre stories of saints, faith healers, and occultists. A continuation of his work begun in 'Miracles and Modern Thought', 'Miracles and the Modern Mind' includes extensive revisions and additions.

Genres: Christian, Theology

Paperback

First published January 1, 1982

About the author

Norman L. Geisler (PhD, Loyola University of Chicago) taught at top evangelical colleges and seminaries for over fifty years and was a distinguished professor of apologetics and theology at Veritas Evangelical Seminary in Murrieta, California. He was the author of nearly eighty books, including the Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics and Christian Ethics. He and his wife lived in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Reviews

[Rodney Harvill · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this book, Norman Geisler does not set out to prove the existence of miracles, but to defend their plausibility. Like a ship turning its prow into the fierce waves of a storm, he does not shy away from difficult challenges, but tackles them head on, addressing the following objections:

- Are miracles impossible?
In addressing this objection, Geisler evaluates Spinoza's argument for the impossibility of miracles. Per this argument, miracles, being violations of immutable and inviolable natural laws, are impossible. As Geisler points out, this argument at its core is a petitio principii that presupposes anti-supernaturalism, using the power of definition to drive a foregone conclusion.

- Are miracles incredible?
In addressing this objection, Geisler evaluates Hume's critique of miracles. There are two ways to interpret this critique. The first is that miracles, being violations of unalterably uniform natural laws, cannot occur. Like Spinoza's argument, this is demonstrably preloaded with anti-supernaturalism. The second interpretation, a more complete version of Hume's objection, is more subjective. Because miracles are rare and natural law describes regular occurrences, for which there is greater evidence than for the rarer miracles, it is wise to base belief on the greater evidence, natural occurrences. In other words, Hume does not try to disprove miracles; rather he argues that they are not believable even if they were to occur. Geisler cogently points out that Hume is confusing evidence with probability and that truth is obtained by weighing evidence, not by weighing probability. Hume's argument is like refusing to believe that an individual won the lottery because millions of other people did not.

- Are miracles irrational?
In addressing this objection, Geisler addresses arguments against miracles by Anthony Flew and George Chryssides. Per Flew's argument, the evidence for general and repeatable natural events is greater than that for particular and unrepeatable miracles. Given this, the evidence is weighted against miracles. In his evaluation of this argument, Geisler points out that Flew's position is so preloaded with naturalism as to be unfalsifiable. He also notes that it would preclude us from accepting the historicity of unrepeatable unusual events from the past and that good scientists do not reject out of hand unrepeated singularities; on the contrary, they investigate them. Like Flew, Chryssides objects to miracles on grounds of unrepeatability. Per his argument, miracles, neither regular nor repeatable, can be attributed to a rational agent. In evaluating this argument, Geisler notes that repeatability is not the sole criterion of identifying a rational agent. Great works of art are not repeatable but can easily be recognized as the product of intelligence. Likewise, language is not necessarily regular, but its complexity is a clear giveaway that intelligence is involved. Furthermore, in his attempt to rule out supernaturalism logically, Chryssides holds his own naturalism sacrosanct. It is fair game for critical evaluation, too.

- Are miracles unscientific?

- Are miracles identifiable?

- Are miracles mythological?

- Are miracles historical?

Are miracles essential?

Are miracles definable?

Are miracles antinatural?

Are miracles distinguishable?

Are miracles actual?

[Glenn Crouch · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an enjoyable read - good to get back into some basic Apologetics and looking at Philosophical arguments.

The books is a "little old" (now over 20 years ago) and so doesn't really address arguments made by some of the New Atheists - though the Author correctly states several times, that if you don't allow for the possible existence of God, then no point arguing for miracles :)

So the arguments are more directed to the ones from the Enlightenment onwards. The Author makes good use of C S Lewis and others that have gone before him.