Arguments from Miracles

So far, we have concerned ourselves chiefly with deductive arguments. We shall now consider an inductive argument, the argument from miracles. Of course, reports of miracles are nothing new. History is replete with miraculous claims. The question is, can any be verified and, if so, what, if anything, do they prove? 

It is often claimed by atheists that, since the advent of the scientific method, miracle claims have dropped dramatically and only tend to occur in our 'modern age' in countries with less access to education. Of course, aside from being a version of chronological snobbery and cultural elitism, it blatantly commits the genetic fallacy. 

However, more importantly, it is a claim that is actually false. Scholar Craig Keener decided to look into the prevalence of miracle claims over time and found that, contrary to the aforementioned atheistic narrative, there have been hundreds of millions of eyewitness reports of 'miracles' in the 20th and 21st centuries. Moreover, many of these come from 'educated', highly developed/first world countries, also. 

Of course, with such numbers, it is hard to investigate every single one of them. Nevertheless, there are many reports of miracles that have evidence beyond eyewitness testimony and thus can be externally verified. For instance, Gary Habermas related an account of a woman whose diseased spleen, which was later surgically removed, grew back and completely healthy. 

Other examples related by Habermas include near-death out-of-body experiences. There was one account given by a woman who claimed she saw the top of the hospital building and said she saw an old shoe. A member staff checked it out on a whim and found the specific shoe exactly as described. Another woman claimed she saw her family members (who were at their home and not even in the hospital) and was able to accurately describe what they had been doing at the time. 

Now, one counter argument is that miracle claims and reports come to us from different religions and they all can't be true. This premise is certainly true enough. However, the atheist then leaps to the completely unwarranted conclusion that all such reports must therefore be false. I shouldn't have to explain how this is a complete and utter non-sequitur. 

If competing claims within a particular meant that all such claims are false, this would surely invalidate every avenue of human inquiry, every field, and every discipline known to man. It seems fairly obvious that God could exist, but every religion be false (or at the least, not completely correct). It is possible to construct a logically and internally consistent version of religious pluralism, after all. 

Obviously, not every religion can be fully correct, since they have competing claims, but we could feasibly grant that they all possess a modicum of truth or a valid way of seeking God. However, need we resort to religious pluralism to escape this charge? After all, many religions acknowledge the existence of evil beings who operate in opposition to God. 

Moreover, there are religions also that acknowledge that God performs miracles amongst all peoples, and not just amongst those who adhere to their religion. So, it is perfectly possible for there to be miracles from competing religions, but only one religion be completely true. 

Of course, for the most part, the kinds of miracles under discussion generally do not provide evidence for a particular religion. General miracles certainly show that there exists a realm beyond the physical world but is not enough to show any one religion (if any) is fully correct. 

In my studies, I have found that only one religion stands or falls on a single miracle claim, and that is Christianity. Christianity claims that God is triune; He is three persons in one being, the Unoriginate Father, the Eternally Begotten Son, and the Holy Spirit who eternally proceeds from the Father. 

They claim that Jesus was the incarnation of the Son and preached His own death and resurrection before being killed and then risen from the dead three days later in vindication of His claims. If this is so, then this would clearly establish Christianity as being the only religion that is fully correct in its teachings. 

So, whilst general miracles can definitely be taken as evidence of the supernatural, only Christ's Resurrection determines which religion is actually correct. No other religion makes specific historical claims like this that are capable of being externally verified. As such, having reviewed the various arguments in favour of the existence of God, and concluding that they show beyond a reasonable doubt that God almost certainly exists, we shall next move onto the central claims of Christianity.