2 of 8

HIS DEFINITION

“That which has a divine cause , not that whose cause a human person fails to understand.”

(Found in his book; Summa Contra Gentiles.)

3 of 8

HE SAID:

There were 3 types of miracles:
Events done by God, which nature could never do.
Events done by God, which nature could do, but not in that order.
Events done by God, which nature can do, but God does without the use of natural law.

4 of 8

POINT 1

His definition highlights the religious believers basic point that: miracles are events caused by God also obtained in the Latin word for miracle “Miraculum”- meaning an object of wonder.

E.g. The story of Jesus curing the paralytic (Mark 2:1-12) , the believers had no interest in how it was done but the event as a whole was just wonderful to them.

Because his definition reflects the Christian teachings on miracles, therefore we can say all the events said to be miracles in the bible, is agreed to by Thomas Aquinas.

5 of 8

POINT 2

His ideas come for Aristotle. Both Aquinas and Aristotle believed everything which exists has a nature. They defined nature as: the ability of something i.e. what something can do. E.g. the difference between human and animal nature is that, humans can think of the future and the meaning of life and death. He also says:

Divine cause= Miracle= events are not normal part of the nature of things.

6 of 8

WHAT DOES HUME SAY ABOUT AQUINAS’ MIRACLE?

Hume’s definition: “miracle is a violation of the laws of nature.”

So using Aquinas’ example of Jesus curing the paralytic, For Hume this event breaks the law of nature- that is, as we know that according to nature, we can move, walk using our legs, move our arms, write using our hands because it is their function obtained through cell division…etc. However, we would not be able to carry these activities out either because these parts are weak or we just do not have them- cell division could go wrong, meaning that was how nature made it. Therefore curing the paralysed person is just unlikely.

7 of 8

Hume’s example which explains the law of nature is such that;

When you throw a book of your desk, it falls on the floor. This is because the force of gravity pulls it down.

This can be tested, we can collect evidence to demonstrate this however, what evidence do we have for the paralysed person? We could use the miracle story in the Bible as evidence, Aquinas focuses on but there is more evidence to back Hume’s explanations which to Hume is what this is all about-proof. Nature is fixed and rigid as the laws of nature are unchanging.

8 of 8

“By definition, miracles can never happen”

Aquinas’ definition- “That which has a divine cause , not that whose cause a human person fails to understand”, the divine cause is God and as this definition is a reflection of the Bible miracles, therefore we can say that it is incorrect according to Aquinas to say miracles can never happen. This is because Hume’s definition states that miracles are violating the laws of nature however, the Bible stories come from a culture lacking any idea about laws of nature, instead people explained the world around them by the intervention of God. So the whole issues of miracles is interpreted differently, depending on our knowledge of the world.