Still No Historical Evidence for Miracles
Kevin R. Henke
November 13, 2022
In Henke (2022ft), I first criticized Mr. Lundahl’s frequently flippant and inappropriate responses to my essays. Next, I specifically responded to one of his rash statements from Lundahl (2022q) in response to Henke (2022u): “The Pool Game in C.S. Lewis’ Miracles and Its Citation in Lundahl (2022a) Fail to Demonstrate the Miracles Cannot Violate Natural Law”:
“Rather than carefully reading and thoughtfully responding to my essays, Lundahl (2022q) continues to rush through them and often give flippant and incoherent responses that do not adequately address what we’re discussing. He needs to take some time to go through each of my essays and respond properly. Again, we would not have this problem, if Mr. Lundahl had simply responded with one coherent and well-organized essay per round rather than breaking up my essays with a lot of flippant line-by-line comments.
In response to Henke (2022u), Lundahl (2022q) simply makes the following comments:
“Basically repeats the same as previous. And that they "cannot" violate natural law is not a requirement for my case of giving the miraculous accounts same burden of historical evidence as for other important events, it is the opposite that is a requirement for motivating Henke's tactic of giving them a hugely more massive one.”
Here, again, Lundahl (2022q) makes claims that he cannot support with evidence. How can Mr. Lundahl demonstrate that miraculous claims in the distant past were real, when any physical evidence is long gone and when we know that people often lie or misinterpret events? Before Mr. Lundahl can claim that there is “historical evidence” of miracles, he’s got to demonstrate that miracles are even possible under strictly controlled present-day conditions (Henke 2022b and Henke 2022co). He has not done so.
As I again stated in Henke (2022u), I agree with Mr. Lundahl that God can act without violating natural law. However, starting with Lundahl (2022a), Mr. Lundahl repeatedly claimed that God would never violate a natural law when he does a miracle. In Henke (2022u), I again asked him to finally answer my question: how does Mr. Lundahl know that if God exists that he would never violate natural law? Yet, in his previous statements in Lundahl (2022q) about an instantaneous healing of someone with Hansen’s disease, Mr. Lundahl admitted that miracles can be “contrary” to natural law (see Henke 2022fr). How is being “contrary” to natural law not admitting that miracles contradict or violate natural law?” [my emphasis]
Lundahl (2022w) then briefly and unsatisfactorily replies to my bolded sentence in Henke (2022ft):
“The actual sentence quoted did not claim there was historical evidence, it claimed that any historical evidence presented should adhere to same standards of evidence as other unusual events of the past.”
As I’ve said many times before, for a past event to be labelled as historical, it needs to be verified with external evidence (e.g., Henke 2022b). Certainly, “unusual events” have occurred in the past, but that’s no reason to invoke “God did it!”, “Angels did it!” or “Demons were responsible!” to explain them (or more accurately to explain them away). That’s senseless and superstitious god-of-the-gaps thinking. Because the supernatural is only limited by the human imagination, it can only provide a cheap, untestable and worthless “explanation” for any past event. Now, I’ve already shown that it’s not possible to demonstrate that a miracle occurred in the past (Henke 2022b; Henke 2022co). The crucial evidence is more than likely all gone and any eyewitnesses can misinterpret events or lie. Far more probable natural explanations need to be evaluated to explain unusual events in the past, such as what exactly happened to the Lost Colony of Roanoke. However, even after extensive investigations, no solutions may be found and the unusual events may remain mysterious.