The Case for Faith by Lee Strobel
Week 3: Objection 2 — Since Miracles Contradict Science, Only the Gullible Believe in Them
Read Objection 2 (Chapter 2) of The Case for Faith. Interview with William Lane Craig. Key passages: John 11:38–44; Acts 2:22.
Previewing Week 3 of The Case for Faith
Read 3 of 7 discussion questions below. Unlock the complete 11-week guide when you’re ready.
Are miracles scientifically impossible, or simply unexpected? This week William Lane Craig walks Strobel through the philosophical assumptions buried inside the 'science vs. miracles' objection.
Discussion Questions
7 questions1.Craig argues that the objection 'miracles are impossible' often smuggles in a philosophical assumption — namely, naturalism (the belief that nature is all there is) — and then presents it as a scientific conclusion. Can you explain that distinction in your own words? Why does it matter?
2.David Hume's famous argument against miracles holds that the uniform experience of nature always outweighs any testimony for a miraculous exception. Craig counters that this argument is circular. What is the circularity Hume falls into, and do you find Craig's rebuttal persuasive?
3.Craig points out that science describes how the natural world normally operates — but that a miracle, by definition, is God acting in an unusual way within His own creation. Does that distinction help you think about the relationship between science and faith? Where does it still feel uncomfortable?