I’ve just finished Narnia author C.S. Lewis’ book Miracles and provide a review in the video above. I really enjoyed it and was fascinated by the philosophical arguments Lewis uses to argue against naturalism, the idea that nature is all that there is and that miracles thus are impossible. His main argument is that if naturalism were true we would have no reason to believe that our reasoning reflect reality, an argument I have written more about here. Lewis also uses a moral argument for the existence of a supernatural or transcendent reality, and answers to several objections to miracles.
Home » Signs & Wonders » C.S. Lewis on Why It’s Wrong to Say that Miracles Are Impossible
C.S. Lewis on Why It’s Wrong to Say that Miracles Are Impossible
Popular Posts
Recent Commens
| half-girl, half-robo… on Why Churches Should Abandon St… | |
 | garycummings on Don Murphy: “Full Gospel… |
 | teresa swinton on Heidi Baker: The Blind Woman… |
 | David WESTER on 7 Reasons Why House Churches a… |
 | Bobby Stewart on Seeing Jesus |
Networks
4 Comments
Leave a comment
The author
Micael Grenholm, a Swedish charismactivist, apologist and author.
A Living Alternative
God vs Inequality
Charismactivism 
Hi, I really liked some of your reasoning in discussing this subject, although I don’t shear all your points. It’s true that naturalist arguments are self-defeated in the sense that mind, reasoning and spiritual experiences exist beyond materiel and sensitive world, no one can deny that. I think natural and supernatural represent the two faces of a single coin of the truth about our existence and that of our world. Complementarity is a fact rather than contraposition. OUr reality is shaped out of two sides, soul and substance, every single element out there or in our body is a prove of that. when I say out there I mean physics laws in its two dimensions, classical physics and quantum. Biology is also another field which demonstrate that there are limits to the substantial world after-which other dimensions and logics are taking the lead.
Thus, Miracle cannot be perceived by natural laws simply because it doesn’t belong to that frame of logic. Other tools and dimension should be in charged. The thing that refuse to admit all the atheist.
Morality is another real pitfall in which atheists are always trapped in when they claim its subjectivity. They don’t give any logical evidence to their claim. they do not realise that it is even dangerous to say that morality is subjective. Because if we admit that each of us has his own way of perceiving good and bad as persons, nations or cultures it will be a green light to legitimise our absolute actions. Further, there will be no standards to which we can compare or refer to in order to determine the righteous.
For example, a whole nation can be eradicated just by proclaiming that its members are enemies and that they are dangerous under any excuse. Regardless if it is true or not. No matter if killing human beings is considered bad, which is another morale principle, but could be transgressed in this case by giving any interpretation to the action which suit the transgressor. This means that simply no morals can stand without the existence of God as source of objective morality for all human beings and as the one to set justice in the day of judgement.
In these days new atheism based on materialism is mainly becoming a real dogma. locked into one vision, one way of perceiving the truth . Every reasoning must match it’s convictions. However, I do not think that the reasons which allow normal people to think in that way, like these girls you talked to, are always epistemological in nature. Most of this kind of atheists refuse to believe because of negative personal experiences they have with faith. Most have endured unpleasant story during their life because of pseudo religious people sometimes or simply as a reaction of what they read in history about the atrocities done in the name of God.
For this reason I suggest that you should keep talking to these people and illuminate them. because there is a clear difference between an absolute truth of the existence of God and his creation and a mere political and idealogical use of faith by religious people.
When you do so then you and me we can have another kind of discussion in which we can analyse more rationally and in depth the truth of the truths, Judaism, Christianity or Islam, which is the true faith.
Hi, I really like some of your reasoning in discussing this subject, although I don’t shear all your points. It’s true that naturalist arguments are self-defeated in the sense that mind, reasoning and spiritual experiences exist beyond materiel and sensitive world, no one can deny that. I think natural and supernatural represent the two faces of a single coin of the truth about our existence and that of our world. Complementarity is a fact rather than contraposition. This reality is shaped out of two sides, soul and substance, every single element out there or in our body is a prove of that. when I say out there I mean physics laws in its two dimensions, classical physics and quantum. Biology is also another field which demonstrate that there are limits to the substantial world after-which other dimensions and logics are taking the lead. Miracle cannot be perceived by natural laws simply because it doesn’t belong to that frame of logic. Other tools and dimension should be in charged. The thing that refuse to admit all the atheist.
Morality is another real pitfall in which atheists are always trapped in when they claim its subjectivity. They don’t give any logical evidence to their claim. they do not realise that it is even dangerous to say that morality is subjective. Because if we admit that each of us has his own way of perceiving good and bad as persons, nations or cultures it will be a green light to legitimise our absolute actions. Further, there will be no standards to which we can compare or refer to in order to determine the righteous.
For example, a whole nation can be eradicated just by proclaiming that thier members are enemies and that they are dangerous under any excuse. Regardless if it is true or not. No matter if killing human beings is considered bad, which is another morale principle, but could be transgressed in this case by giving any interpretation to the action. This means that simply no morals can stand without the existence of God as source of objective morality for all human beings and as the one to set justice in the day of judgement.
In these days new atheism based on materialism is mainly becoming a real dogma. locked into one vision, one way of perceiving the truth . Every reasoning must match it’s convictions. However, I do not think that the reasons which allow normal people to think in that way, like these girls you talked to, are always epistemological in nature. Most of this kind of atheists refuse to believe because of negative personal experiences they have with faith. Most have endured unpleasant story during their life because of pseudo religious people sometimes or simply as a reaction of what they read in history about the atrocities done in the name of God.
For this reason I suggest that you should keep talking to these people and illuminate them. because there is a clear difference between an absolute truth of the existence of God and his creation and a mere political and idealogical use of faith by religious people.
When you do so then you and me we can have another kind of discussion in which we can analyse more rationally and in depth the truth of the truths, Judaism, Christianity or Islam, which is the true faith.
Hi Rach! Thank you for your long and insightful comment. I agree with you that atheism can’t explain the existence of objective moral values and duties, which is a powerful argument for God’s existence. I don’t really understood what were the points where you disagreed with me?
Blessings!
Hi Michael,
Thanks for your nice reply. You are right I was not explicit in showing my disagreement with you because it was not my first intention. But yes, I disagree in a sense that as a non-Christian but a believer of God I consider that Miracle has a purpose in God’s will. Miracles are to consolidate the messengers of God and support them. To me, Miracles ‘s mission is to give Prophets irrefutable argument to face disbelievers and challenge them within their utmost contemporary achievements, science medicine, literature, etc. Rationally speaking, I find it senseless that God would decide to use Miracle and turn into human being for any purpose. He does not need that. a quick check to the nature of Miracles through history shows this fact. Moses had a Miracle of snake defying his times mastery of magic. Jesus (PUH) he was given a Miracle of healing, beside other Miracles of course, and we know in that period of time medicine was so flourishing.
Best regards,