Miracles Are Not Violations of the Laws of Nature Because the Laws Do Not Entail Regularity

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Some have tried to make miracles compatible with the laws of nature by re-defining them as something other than interventions. By contrast, this article argues that although miracles are divine interventions, they are not violations of the laws of nature. Miracles are also not exceptions to the laws, nor do the laws not apply to them. The laws never have exceptions; they never are violated or suspended, are probably necessary and unchangeable, and apply also to divine interventions. We need to reconsider not miracles but laws. The main claim of this article is that laws of nature do not entail regularities, and therefore that miracles do not violate the laws. We need a new theory of the laws of nature: the tendency theory.
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-03-14
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
.Butterfield, Jeremy & Earman, John
How the Laws of Physics Lie.Forster, Malcolm R.
.Swinburne, R. G.

View all 26 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
275 ( #15,275 of 47,372 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
138 ( #3,661 of 47,372 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.