As I’m developing a formulation and defense for the miraculous argument for God’s existence I’ve enjoyed listening to lectures on YouTube by other Christian apologists where they defend the key premise, that miracles occur, from both a philosophical and an empirical perspective. The main philosophical objection to miracles was raised by David Hume in the 19th century, an argument that is still often referenced to by atheists and skeptics but which is actually circular and not very persuasive, as Timothy McGrew explains:

It is generally agreed today that Hume was simply lacking miraculous experience himself and so just assumed that nobody else was experiencing it. His remark of how a dead man coming back to life “has never been observed in any age or country” is embarrassingly naïve, not just dismissing the resurrection of Jesus a priori but also the numerous dead raising accounts of his time. As I have met and interviewed a man who was raised from the dead I can assure you Hume was wrong.

Helen de Cruz shows how Hume’s definition of a miracle as a violation of the laws of nature is very problematic; obviously a miracle is supernatural but the discourse of “violation” is rather pejorative in a very unnecessary way. de Cruz also gives examples of contemporary miracle accounts that ought to make us question the axiom of miracles being impossible:

Both McGrew and de Cruz references Craig Keener who has been a pioneer in miracle research during just the last five years and who have effectively shown why the common philosophical objections to miracles aren’t valid and how the existence of medically verified healings as well as numerous trustworthy eyewitness reports should open ourselves up to the possibility that God does intervene in His creation. There are many lectures by Keener available but one of my favorites is this one:

Enjoy the clips and may God do amazing miracles in your life!