As my readers know, I am reading Josh McDowell’s book Evidence that Demands a Verdict. On page 655 I encountered his account of an old Scottish philosopher, one David Hume. This sent me searching my library for a booklet by Peter Barnes, A Handful of Pebbles: Theological Liberalism. In this booklet Barnes explains Hume’s philosophy rather well, I think. I see it as a pre-cursor to the current belief known as “postmodernism” which attempts to undermine Christianity. Barnes writes as follows:

“Christianity claims to be supernatural. In fact, everything is supernatural – the creation itself, God’s providential care of the world, miracles, the judgement at the end, even the person of Christ Himself. David Hume (1711-76) – to cite one critic- rejects this whole approach, and so writes of miracles: ‘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 as can possibly be imagined.’ Hume has missed the obvious point that by definition there can be no miracles unless there are laws which are transcended by a supernatural intervention. His statement is not so much an argument as an assertion.

Hume’s world view simply excluded the possibility of miracles. In fact, any kind of evidence of supernaturalism is discarded as something which does not happen. Such dogmatic scepticism is not uncommon, although it usually hides behind scientific-sounding phrases. Howard Kee even claims that the miracles were never intended to be understood as historical events but only a symbols. But symbolic cures and feedings neither delight nor upset the general populace.”

How do you humans get convinced by someone like David Hume and forsake the one who said “I am the Way the Truth and the Life”?

Gibber! Gibber!

Chugley

The Truth Loving Miracle Believing Chimp