Sophia

, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp 167–177 | Cite as

Aquinas’s Miracles and the Luciferous Defence: The Problem of the Evil/Miracle Ratio

Article

Abstract

Miracles and the problem of evil are two prominent areas of research within philosophy of religion. On occasion these areas converge, with God’s goodness being brought into question by the claim that either there is a lack of miracles, or there are immoral miracles. In this paper I shall highlight a second manner in which miracles and the problem of evil relate. Namely, I shall give reason as to why what is considered to be miraculous may be dependent upon a particular response to the problem of natural evil. To establish this claim, I shall focus upon Aquinas’s definition of a miracle and a particular free-will defence, the Luciferous defence.

Keywords

Miracles Problem of evil Aquinas Free-will defence 

References

  1. Basinger, D. (1984). Miracles as Violations: Some Clarifications. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 22, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boyd, G. A. (2001). Satan and the Problem of Evil. New York: Intervarsity Press.Google Scholar
  3. Collins, J. (1947). The Thomistic Philosophy of the Angels. Washington, D.C: Catholic University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Davies, B. (1993). An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Davis, S. T. (1981). Free Will and Evil. In S. Davis (Ed.), Encountering Evil, pp. 73–107. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.Google Scholar
  6. Dietl, P. (1968). On Miracles. American Philosophical Quarterly, 5, 130–134.Google Scholar
  7. Flew, A. (1967). Miracles. In P. Edwards (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Philosophy vol. 5, pp. 346–53. New York: Macmillan and Free Press.Google Scholar
  8. Geisler, N. (1990). When Skeptics Ask. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.Google Scholar
  9. Hebblethwaite, B. (1976). Evil, Suffering and Religion. New York: Hawthorn Books.Google Scholar
  10. Hughes, C. (1992). Miracles, Laws of Nature and Causation. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, supplementary volume 66, 179–205.Google Scholar
  11. Hume, D. (1975). Of Miracles. In L. A. Selby-Bigge (Ed.), Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, pp. 114–116. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Keller, J. (1995). A Moral Argument Against Miracles. Faith and Philosophy, 12, 54–78.Google Scholar
  13. Keller, E., & Keller, M.-L. (1984). Miracles in Dispute: A Continuing Debate. London: SCM Press.Google Scholar
  14. Larmer, R. (1996). Questions of Miracle. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Larmer, R. (1998). Water into Wine?: An Investigation of the Concept of Miracle. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Lewis, C. S. (1940). The Problem of Pain. London: Collins.Google Scholar
  17. Luck, M. (2007). Supernatural Miracles and Religious Inclusiveness. Sophia, 46, 287–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McKenzie, D. (1999). Miracles Are Not Immoral: A Response to James Keller’s Moral Argument Against Miracles. Religious Studies, 35, 73–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Overall, C. (1996). Miracles as Evidence Against the Existence of God. In R. Larmer (Ed.), Questions of Miracle, pp. 132–139. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Plantinga, A. (1977). God, Freedom, and Evil. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  21. Purtill, R. L. (1997). Defining Miracles. In R. Douglas Geivett & G. R. Habermas (Eds.), In Defense of Miracles: A Comprehensive Case For God’s Action in History, pp. 61–72. Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press.Google Scholar
  22. Swinburne, R. (1970). The Concept of Miracle. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  23. Swinburne, R. (2004). The Existence of God. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vardy, P. (1992). The Puzzle of Evil. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  25. Ward, K. (2002). Believing in Miracles. Zygon, 37, 741–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wiles, M. (1986). God’s Action in the World. London: SCM Press.Google Scholar
  27. Young, R. (1972). Miracles and Epistemology. Religious Studies, 8, 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Humanities and Social Sciences, & The Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public EthicsCharles Sturt UniversityWagga WaggaAustralia

Personalised recommendations