(May 18, 2015 at 12:36 am)robvalue Wrote: I tried to read that WLC article, and it seems to come down to this:
God exists, and is very powerful. Therefor, God can do amazing things, and we will call them miracles.
Everything else is window dressing. He has not demonstrated God exists. Obviously, if God exists, with all the power normally attributed to him, he can do amazing things. It's a tautology. And even if it were true, he still offers no way you could ever distinguish a miracle from a non miracle. Because there isn't one.
What I got was that WLC claimed Spinoza and Hume were wrong to say that miracles couldn't happen because of the regularity of nature.
Spinoza said the perfection and regularity of God provided the regularity of natural law and miracles couldn't fight that.
WLC said that God's override of natural law was just another aspect of God.
Hume said you should apportion belief according to evidence.
WLC said that miracles are a special case by God and He isn't bound to conform to his prior consistent actions.
I say, sure, an omnipotent God could override any of the rules He set up IF HE EXISTED. That's a really big IF.
So how, exactly, does God know that She's NOT a brain in a vat? 
