𝐙𝐔 𝐋𝐄𝐇 𝐑𝐔𝐈𝐇𝐇𝐋𝐎: 𝐓𝐇𝐋𝐀𝐑𝐀𝐔 𝐍𝐔𝐍 𝐀 𝐍𝐆𝐇𝐀𝐖𝐍𝐆 𝐃𝐀𝐍

1                                      

                                                  ATHEISM BIHCHIANNA 6

                                        Thilmak Hnawlna (The Problem of Miracles)

            Thilmak (miracle) chu leilung dân (natural law) awm sa piah lama thil thleng sawina a ni a. Miracle hrim hrimin Pathian awm a kawk chuang lem lo tih kan hria. Amaherawhchu, Pathian rinna nena kalkawp deuh roh tlat leh, miin miracle a pawm theih tawh chuan Pathian awm rin a harsat tawh loh avangin sawi kawp a pawi lovah ngai ila. Sakhaw thurin pawimawh ber berte hi miracle-a innghat a nih miau avangin Pathian awm ring lo chuan miracle a hnawl titih mai \hin a ni.

            Miracle hnawl chhan fumfe taka sawi hmasatu chu David Hume bawk a ni leh a. Ani sawi bâk hi tuman an la sawi lova, tuman an la hnial fithla thei lo an ti hial a ni. Hume-a chuan, “A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined,”[1] tiin a sawi a. Hume-an a sawi ber chu, miracle hi thil thleng zen zen lo a ni a, leilung dân (natural law) chu thil thleng reng leh kalphung fel tak nei nghet a ni thung a. A awihawm dan a inthlauh êm avangin mi fing chuan miracle awm a awih thei ngai lovang, a ti a ni ber mai. Miracle chungchâng mi sawite chu ‘khual thuthang leh ar pân chuk’ tih ang vel mai maiah a ngai a ni.

            Hume-a thusawi pawm lem lo an tam tih chu chiang sa a ni a. Hnial khan \ha deuh nia langte han phawrh chhuak ila. Philosopher Scientist Stanley L. Jaki chuan, “Insofar as he was a sensationalist or empiricist philosopher he had to grant equal credibility to the recognition of any fact, usual or unusual,” [2]tiin mi sawi hnawl chin neih ngawt chu a dik bik chuan lohzia a sawi a. Oxford mihrâng C.S.Lewis pawhin, “Now of course we must agree with Hume that if there is absolutely ‘uniform experience’ against miracles, if in other words they have never happened, why then they never have. Unfortunately we know the experience against them to be uniform only if we know that all the reports of them are false. And we can know all the reports to be false only if we know already that miracles have never occurred. In fact, we are arguing in a circle.”[3] Hume-a hian \an lam nei miah lova a finfiahnate hi bûk lovin, a sawiselnate hi a belhkhawm mai niin a lang a, miracle awm leh awm loh sawi fiah aiin awih a \ul lohzia sawina a ni zawk a ni.

            Science hmasawnna ngai pawimawhtu \henkhatin miracles hi hnawl an duh fo mai. Ninian Smart, Patrick Nowell-Smith, Alistair McKinnon leh Malcolm Diamond te hi a lar pawl an ni awm e. An sawi dân tlangpui chu:

1.      Only what has predictive capabilities can qualify as an explanation of an event.

2.      A miracle explanation cannot make verifiable prediction.

3.      Therefore, a miracle explanation does not qualify as an explanation of the event, tih te

Scientific method hma ngaiin,

1.      Scientists, as scientists, cannot give up looking for naturalistic explanations for every event.

2.      To admit even one miracle is to give up looking for a natural explanation.

3.      Therefore, to admit miracles is to give up being a scientist.

            He ngaihdan hi \hiah a pawimawh hle mai. Scientific method atana \ha an ti a nih pawhin thil engkim sawina atân chuan a \ha tawk lo tih a chiang a ni. Leilung dân chu Pathian dân a nih miau avangin miracle-in Pathian dân bawhchhia anga kan ngaih a \ul lo ang. Miracle-a Pathian thil tih chuan leilung dân kalphung pangngai kalh angin lang mah se ama lamah chuan danglamna pawi tak a awm ve lo. A thiltum tihhlawhtlin nân thil \henkhat, mihringten miracle kan tih ang hi a ti a ni mai awm e. Kristian Philosopher Colin Brown-a thukhawchâng han sawi chhawng ila, “God is not a God of chaos. Miracles are not necessarily unrepeatable events that science cannot explain. The reason why science cannot explain them is not that they do not belong to any order at all, but that they do not belong to the natural order…(Miracles like the resurrection of Jesus represent) the incursion of the new order into our present order. Such events defy our human understanding. They do not belong to our present range of experience. From our standpoint they clearly violate what we know of nature. But from God’s standpoint, according to the New Testament, they have their place as part of God’s new creation.”[4] Miracle hnawl tur chuan thil thleng tawh zawng zawng hriat leh chian vek a ngai dawn a. Chu chu thil tih theih a ni lo.

---

[1] David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding in Hume’s Enquiries, ed. L.A. Selby-Bigge, 2^nd Edition (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1902), 131.

[2] Quoted by Norman Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999), 458.

[3] C.S. Lewis, Miracles: A Preliminary Study (New York: Macmillan, 1947), 105.

[4] Colin Brown, That You May Believe (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 72.