THE BIBLE & SCIENCE (2)

(Continued from last week...)

The Miracles of the Bible Transcend Science

Because miracles are historical events that can never be repeated, it is impossible to study how they took place. We can only examine the existing evidence of these miracles, as recorded in the Bible.

David Hume, an 18th century Scottish philosopher and historian, claimed very boldly that biblical miracles cannot be proved. He wrote several essays attempting to disprove religion and in one of them he dealt with the subject of miracles. In most debates and discussions on this subject this essay is cited as indisputable proof that the miracles of the Bible did not take place. Hume's main argument is that, "There is more likelihood that the witnesses of a supposed miracle were deceived, than that such a 'violation of the laws of nature' in contradiction to universal experience, should have taken place."

There are at least two things wrong with this argument. The first is Hume's definition of a miracle as 'a violation of the laws of nature.' Miracles do not violate the laws of nature. They only transcend the range of natural forces. For instance, when you raise up your arm you are not violating the law of gravity. You are merely using a greater force to overcome it. In the same manner, when miracles took place, all the laws of Science were still at work, but they were simply overcome by a force greater than nature.

The second thing that is wrong with Hume's argument is that he labels miracles as being in contradiction to universal experience. This begs the question – What is universal experience? Is it limited only to the experience of skeptics like Hume? If so, how can it be universal? To be fair, the term universal experience must also include all the witnesses who testify to miraculous events. In any court of law, the judge's decision is based on the testimony of all available witnesses. As long as they are of good character their testimony cannot be rejected. No testimony can be dismissed from consideration just because the judge is prejudiced against some witnesses.

Because miracles are such rare events in history, the number of human eyewitnesses to them is understandably small. But when we say "a small number" we do not mean that only 1 or 2 persons witnessed each Bible miracle. It may be possible for 1 or 2 to be deceived by what they saw, but this is most unlikely for the witnesses of biblical miracles, who numbered from several tens to several thousands. The ten plagues of Egypt were witnessed by the whole nation of Egypt and the Israelites. Christ's miracle of multiplying 5 loaves and 2 fishes was witnessed by more than 5,000 people (Matthew 14:21). The resurrected Christ was seen by more than 500 brethren at once (1 Corinthians 15:6). But when all these witnesses are added up, they are still few compared with the rest of humanity who did not see these miracles and who must be content to accept the testimony of these 'few' witnesses on the basis of their reliable character.

This is precisely what we do whenever we read the newspapers about an event that goes on in some part of the world. We who do not have the opportunity to have first-hand experience of the events rely entirely on the testimony of a few reporters at the scene. But we fully accept what they have written on the basis of their reputation as truthful reporters. And when the reports from different reporters are consistent with each other, then we have greater confidence to trust what they have written. This is also the way that every court of law verifies the facts of a case – it is all based on the strength of the unified testimony of some credible witnesses. If the court refuses to accept this, then it is no longer possible to make fair judgments on any matter!

Hence, the proof of miracles in the Bible ultimately lies in the character of their witnesses and the quality of their testimony. Although the witnesses of the miracles of the Bible are no longer around to give us a full report of what they saw or to be cross-examined, we do have the next best thing which will be accepted in any court of law – their affidavits (cf. John 21:24 and 1 John 1:1-3).

Since we now possess the affidavits of those who witnessed the miracles, we can scrutinize them thoroughly and compare them one with another. For instance, the 4 Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) provide parallel accounts of Christ's miracles and can be used to verify the accuracy of their witness. Going further than that we may also compare their records with evidences from geography, archaeology and history, such as the writings of Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger. Many who have done this have emerged fully satisfied with the reliability of the biblical records of the miracles and reached the conclusion that there is no reason to doubt their authenticity.

The phenomena of science are established in the same way as the miracles of the Bible – by reliable witnesses. The conclusions of science are founded on eye-witness observations of things that still happen, while the miracles of the Bible are founded on eye-witness observations of things that have already happened. The fact is both witnesses are reliable and trustworthy. And both also have the same origin and purpose. They come from God, the Creator of heaven and earth, and they direct us to look to God, to praise Him and know Him! May we always respond to Science and the Bible by glorifying the Lord – "O LORD our Lord, how excellent is Thy name in all the earth!"

(End)

Adapted from Life BPC Weekly 8 Jul 2007.
Written by Rev. Charles Seet.