Has Science Disproved Miracles?

This is one of the most common objections to Christianity: “We live in a scientific age. We know miracles don’t happen.” But is that actually what science tells us?

What David Hume Actually Argued

The most famous anti-miracle argument comes from Scottish philosopher David Hume (1748). His key claim: the evidence for the regularity of nature will always outweigh testimony for a miracle, because miracles by definition are the least probable explanation for any event.

It sounds convincing until you realize it’s circular. Hume is essentially saying: “Miracles are improbable. How do I know? Because they don’t happen. How do I know they don’t happen? Because they’re improbable.”

This is what philosophers call begging the question — assuming what you’re trying to prove.

What Science Actually Shows

Science discovers and describes the regular patterns of nature — gravity, thermodynamics, electromagnetism. These are real and reliable. But here’s the key insight:

Natural laws describe what happens when no outside force intervenes. They don’t prove outside forces can’t intervene.

C.S. Lewis nailed this: “If God annihilated a pound coin, the laws of arithmetic wouldn’t have been broken. The laws tell you what happens when things are left to themselves. They don’t tell you what won’t be fed into the machine.”

Think of it this way: the law of gravity tells you that objects fall at 9.8 m/s². But if you catch a ball, you haven’t “violated” gravity — you’ve introduced a new force. If God exists and acts, that’s not breaking natural law — it’s adding an agent.

The Real Question

The miracle debate isn’t actually about science. It’s about worldview:

• If naturalism is true (only the material world exists), then miracles are impossible by definition — because there’s nothing outside nature to intervene.
• If theism is true (a God exists who created nature), then miracles are not only possible but expected — because the Creator can interact with His creation.

So the question isn’t “Do miracles violate science?” The question is “Does God exist?” If yes, miracles are straightforwardly possible.

The Evidence Is Stronger Than You Think

Craig Keener’s massive two-volume Miracles (1,172 pages) documents hundreds of well-attested miraculous claims from around the world — including medically documented healings in contexts where fraud or placebo can be reasonably ruled out.

Keener isn’t claiming every miracle report is genuine. But he demonstrates that the evidence base is far larger and more serious than dismissive critics suggest. The a priori rejection of miracles isn’t a scientific conclusion — it’s a philosophical commitment.

Three Common Objections Answered

”But we know dead people don’t come back to life”

That’s exactly the point. The resurrection would be remarkable precisely because it goes against the normal pattern. Christians don’t believe Jesus rose because they didn’t understand death — they understood death perfectly well, which is why the resurrection was so shocking.

”Advanced civilizations don’t believe in miracles”

Actually, miracle belief is growing globally, not shrinking. And many of the scientists who established modern science — Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Kelvin — believed in miracles. This isn’t a primitive-vs-modern divide.

”There’s always a natural explanation we haven’t found yet”

This is “naturalism of the gaps” — the assumption that a natural explanation must exist even when none has been found. It’s the mirror image of “God of the gaps,” and equally fallacious.

John Lennox’s Challenge

Oxford mathematician John Lennox asks a pointed question: “If the laws of nature are God’s regular way of running the universe, why should it be thought irrational to believe that He sometimes might do something special?”

A novelist who normally follows the rules of grammar can still write a surprising plot twist. The rules aren’t violated — the author just did something unexpected.

Honest Acknowledgment

Not every miracle claim is genuine. Many are exaggerated, misunderstood, or fraudulent. Critical evaluation is important. But ruling out miracles before examining the evidence isn’t skepticism — it’s dogmatism.

The honest approach: examine the evidence for specific miracles (especially the resurrection) on their own terms, without assuming the conclusion in advance.