Miracles and Science: Mora than a Miraculous Relationship

Toronto Journal of Theology 28 (1):159-163 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A solicited response to Robert Larmer's defence of the supernaturalist model of miracles. I show why Larmer fails to make his claim plausible that there aren't any good theological reasons to turn away from the supernaturalist model of miracles.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Against Miracles.John Collier - 1986 - Dialogue 25 (2):349-.
Miracles.John King-Farlow - 1962 - International Philosophical Quarterly 2 (2):265-294.
Miracles.Paul Fitzgerald - 1985 - Philosophical Forum 17 (1):48 - 64.
Hume's abject failure: the argument against miracles.John Earman - 2000 - New York: Oxford University Press.
C. S. Peirce on Miracles.Robert H. Ayers - 1980 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 16 (3):242 - 254.
Prophecy, Early Modern Apologetics, and Hume's Argument against Miracles.Peter Harrison - 1999 - Journal of the History of Ideas 60 (2):241 - 256.
Miracles, Evidence, and God.Robert Larmer - 2003 - Dialogue 42 (1):107-.
Proofs of miracles and miracles as proofs.Richard L. Purtill - 1976 - Christian Scholar’s Review 6.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-04-12

Downloads
21 (#720,615)

6 months
1 (#1,516,429)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Yiftach J. H. Fehige
University of Toronto, St. George Campus

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references